Eugene Issac Pitts v. State of Arkansas

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of Pitts's petition for a writ of error coram nobis. It held that the repudiated hair-comparison testimony was not structural error, that Pitts had to show a reasonable probability of a different outcome, and that the trial court properly assessed materiality against the entire trial record. The court also rejected Pitts's law-of-the-case and issue-preclusion arguments because the prior sufficiency review involved a different issue.