Curtis Lamont Horton, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of Curtis Lamont Horton’s postconviction petition because his ineffective-assistance allegations were conclusory and did not establish deficient performance or prejudice. The court also held that alleged trial errors, prosecutorial-misconduct claims, and challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence were not cognizable in a Rule 37.1 proceeding, and that Horton failed to show that his sentences were illegal. The court further concluded that no evidentiary hearing was required and that the trial court properly adopted an order drafted by a deputy prosecuting attorney.