Arkansas State Medical Board v. Schoen

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that defendant abandoned majority of his ineffective assistance claims by making only conclusory arguments and failing to support such argument with citations to authority
• explaining that this Court has “previously rejected the argument that such a pre-trial procedure is erroneous when a defendant has the opportunity to cross-examine similar-transaction witnesses at trial”
• refusing to address arguments appellant raised but did not support with citations to authority or meaningful argument
• nothing to review where appellant provided only “vague reference to alleged hearsay statements by various witnesses . . . [and] little detail or specific record citations to the statements he contends were admitted in error by the trial court”
• nothing for this Court to review where appellant provided only “vague reference to alleged hearsay statements by various witnesses . . . [and] little detail or specific record citations to the statements he contends were admitted in error by the trial court”
• nothing for this Court to review where appellant provided only “vague reference to alleged hearsay statements by various witnesses . . . [and] 15 little detail or specific record citations to the statements he contends were admitted in error by the trial court”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).