Full Opinion

Cite as 2026 Ark. 152 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CV-26-250 Opinion Delivered: October 15, 2026 DUNG THAI TRAN APPELLANT PRO SE APPEAL FROM THE JEFFERSON COUNTY CIRCUIT V. COURT [NO. 35CV-25-1090] DEXTER PAYNE, DIRECTOR, HONORABLE JODI RAINES ARKANSAS DIVISION OF DENNIS, JUDGE CORRECTION APPELLEE AFFIRMED. CORY COX, Special Justice Dung Thai Tran appeals from an order of the Jefferson County Circuit Court dismissing his petition for writ of habeas corpus. In his petition filed pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-112-101 (Repl. 2016), Tran alleged that he was incarcerated without lawful authority because he received a mandatory sentence of life without parole for a crime he committed when he was seventeen years old. He asserts that the mandatory sentence of life without parole contravenes the holding in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012). We affirm. Tran claims that the criminal information filed at the time he was charged reflected an incorrect date of his birth, May 2, 1958, when the actual date of his birth is May 2, 1961. He admits that he made no effort to correct that error at the time of his arrest and subsequent conviction. In 2024, Tran began researching why he failed to receive a federal income-tax refund for tax years 2020 and 2021 from the “Recovery Rebate Credit” he claimed for the “Economic Impact Payments”. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Taxpayer Advocate Service discovered that Tran’s Social Security number had been assigned to two different individuals in the IRS system. The case advocate asked Tran for additional information in an effort to resolve the mix-up. Tran responded by claiming that his date of birth is May 2, 1961, not May 2, 1958. Tran attached this response to his habeas petition, contending that it proves he was under the age of eighteen when he committed capital murder. The circuit court denied and dismissed the petition, finding Tran’s claim that he was under the age of eighteen when he committed capital murder—supported by a “copy of a letter wherein he states he was born on May 2, 1961”—does not support a claim of probable cause to believe that he is being illegally detained. The circuit court’s ruling in a habeas proceeding will be upheld unless it is clearly erroneous. Davis v. State, 2025 Ark. 185, 722 S.W.3d 513. A decision is clearly erroneous when the appellate court, after reviewing all the evidence, is left with the firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Id. On appeal, Tran argues, as he did in his petition, that he is being illegally detained. Specifically, he contends that his date of birth and Social Security number are both incorrect on the criminal information and that the Arkansas Division of Correction failed to correct the error when he raised “the Miller [c]laim,” contending he provided proof of his age to the IRS. Tran claims that he disclosed his date of birth as May 2, 1961, in response to a question in a letter from the Little Rock Taxpayer Advocate Service and that he would not purposely provide false information to the IRS and subject himself to penalties under state and federal tax laws. We hold that the circuit court did not clearly err in finding that Tran’s self-serving assertion of his age qualifying him as a Miller defendant was insufficient evidence to establish probable cause that he was under the age of eighteen when he committed capital murder. It is Tran’s burden to show that probable cause exists to believe that he is being illegally detained. See Ark. Code Ann. § 16-112-103(a)(1); Hobbs v. Gordon, 2014 Ark. 225, 434 S.W.3d 364. Accordingly, Tran must provide more than a bare assertion in his pleadings to meet his burden of establishing probable cause. See Morgan v. Kelley, 2019 Ark. 189, 575 S.W.3d 108. Here, Tran relies only on the letter from the Taxpayer Advocate Service as “other evidence” to establish that he was a juvenile at the time of the offense. That letter requests that Tran provide his date of birth and does not, itself, substantiate Tran’s newly claimed date of birth. Further, the letter states only that there may be an issue with his Social Security number; it does not address his date of birth. We affirm. WEBB, J., not participating. Dung Thai Tran, pro se appellant. Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: James Hill, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.