Michael Tornavacca v. State of Arkansas

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of Tornavacca’s Rule 37 petition after concluding that his due-process challenge to removal from drug court was cognizable but did not warrant relief because the later postconviction hearing fully litigated whether he committed the alleged violations. The court also held that counsel’s alleged deficiencies caused no prejudice because the evidence supported the second and third strikes, and it declined to consider additional procedural objections not preserved below. Justice Danielson, concurring, agreed that the drug-court process provided sufficient due process in this case, while Justice Brown, dissenting, would have held that Tornavacca was entitled to minimum procedural protections before termination.