Kenneth Isom, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee

Summary

The court granted Isom permission to reinvest jurisdiction in the circuit court so he could pursue a writ of error coram nobis based on alleged Brady violations. It held that conflicting sworn accounts by a prosecutor about whether scissors were discovered during an investigation involving a possible alternate suspect made the proposed claim sufficiently meritorious to warrant an evidentiary hearing. The court also directed the circuit court to consider Isom’s additional Brady claims and the issue of diligence. Justice Danielson, dissenting, would have denied the petition because the alleged evidence was not sufficiently material or prejudicial to undermine the convictions.