Rickey Dale Newman, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee

Summary

The Supreme Court of Arkansas granted Rickey Dale Newman's petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the circuit court to pursue a writ of error coram nobis on two grounds: that he was incompetent at the time of his capital murder trial, and that the prosecutor withheld material exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland. The court found the incompetency claim apparently meritorious because Dr. Charles Mallory—the sole witness supporting the original competency finding—admitted in federal habeas proceedings to significant scoring errors and use of improper tests, and it held that Newman exercised the required due diligence, distinguishing Echols v. State. On the Brady claim, the court concluded the record showed possible violations across eight categories of allegedly suppressed favorable evidence but left the favorability, prejudice, and materiality determinations to the circuit court, noting Newman had presented evidence he might have been incompetent when he confessed. If Newman prevails on either claim and the writ issues, he is entitled to a new trial.