Serandon Starling v. State of Arkansas

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of Starling’s petition to correct an illegal sentence. It held that his double-jeopardy-based challenge concerned the manner in which the judgment was imposed, not a facially illegal sentence, and was therefore untimely under the applicable postconviction deadline. The court also held that the trial court could deny the clearly meritless petition without a hearing or more detailed written findings.