{
  "id": 1914659,
  "name": "IN RE REVIEW OF HABEAS CORPUS PROCEEDINGS",
  "name_abbreviation": "In re Review of Habeas Corpus Proceedings",
  "decision_date": "1993-05-10",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "168",
  "last_page": "169",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "313 Ark. 168"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "852 S.W.2d 791"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "302 Ark. 109",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1884336
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1990,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/302/0109-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "224 Ark. 639",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1646475
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1955,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/224/0639-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 90,
    "char_count": 990,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.896,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.06977665493239181
    },
    "sha256": "1aee1b884dd339294925550c4215258e911e7ef54ba4ea155156404f35f58ce7",
    "simhash": "1:5c326da0fa3fe318",
    "word_count": 168
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:14:05.799320+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "IN RE REVIEW OF HABEAS CORPUS PROCEEDINGS"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nIn Fulks v. Walker, 224 Ark. 639, 275 S.W.2d 873 (1955), we recited the history resulting in the use of certiorari as the proper means of seeking review of habeas corpus proceedings. We concluded that appeal was more appropriate than certiorari, and we directed that henceforth review of habeas corpus proceedings would be by appeal.\nIn City of Clinton v. Jones, 302 Ark. 109, 787 S.W.2d 242 (1990), without reference to Fulks v. Walker, we said certiorari was the proper means of review of habeas corpus proceedings. We should not have done so. Since our decision in the City of Clinton case we have permitted review by either method, and confusion has resulted.\nWe again call attention to Fulks v. Walker. The proper means of review of habeas corpus proceedings is by appeal. After July 1,1993, we will permit review of habeas corpus proceedings only by appeal.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "IN RE REVIEW OF HABEAS CORPUS PROCEEDINGS\n852 S.W.2d 791\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered May 10, 1993"
  },
  "file_name": "0168-02",
  "first_page_order": 198,
  "last_page_order": 199
}