Tyrone Swift v. State of Arkansas

Summary

The court affirmed dismissal of Swift's petition because his sentences were within the statutory ranges and therefore were not illegal on their face. Allegations concerning the habitual-offender designation, counsel's advice, plea understanding, and parole eligibility either did not establish facial illegality or were claims that had to be brought under the applicable post-conviction procedure. The court also upheld the conclusion that any such post-conviction claims were untimely and successive.