Justia Criminal Law Opinion Summaries

Aaron Spencer was charged with second-degree murder and a firearm enhancement for the shooting death of Michael Fosler. Fosler had been charged with sexual offenses against Spencer’s daughter and was out on bond. On the night of the incident, Spencer found his daughter in Fosler’s truck and forced it off the road, resulting in an altercation where Spencer shot Fosler, who died at the scene. The case garnered significant media attention, leading the State to request a gag order to preserve the integrity of the jury pool and ensure a fair trial.The Lonoke County Circuit Court granted the State’s motion for a gag order without holding a hearing. The order restricted various parties, including attorneys, public officials, and Spencer’s family, from making public statements about the case. Spencer opposed the gag order, arguing it violated his constitutional rights to a fair and public trial and free speech. He filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Arkansas Supreme Court, seeking to vacate the gag order.The Arkansas Supreme Court reviewed the case and found that the gag order was overly broad, vague, and lacked a factual basis. The court held that the order constituted a plain, manifest, clear, and gross abuse of discretion. The court emphasized that gag orders should be a last resort and must be narrowly tailored based on specific factual findings. The court granted Spencer’s petition for writ of certiorari, issued the writ, and vacated the circuit court’s gag order. The court did not preclude the possibility of a subsequent, more narrowly tailored gag order after an evidentiary hearing. View "SPENCER v. STATE OF ARKANSAS" on Justia Law

Deric Smith was convicted by a jury in the Jefferson County Circuit Court of capital murder for the shooting death of Emmanuel Foster and first-degree battery for wounding Jason Anderson. He was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole for the murder and fifteen years for the battery, with additional firearm enhancements. Smith appealed, arguing insufficient evidence for the capital murder conviction and that the State failed to disprove his justification defense.Smith was charged with premeditated and deliberate capital murder and first-degree battery, with firearm enhancements. He claimed justification as a defense. Smith and his girlfriend, Lamiesha Toney, were tried together. The victims were shot while in Smith’s car, and Smith and Toney later surrendered to the police. Toney initially claimed she shot the victims in self-defense, but other witnesses suggested Smith was the shooter. Smith testified that he shot Anderson and Foster in self-defense during a struggle over a gun.The circuit court denied Smith’s motion for a directed verdict, and the jury convicted him. Smith argued on appeal that the circuit court erred in denying his directed-verdict motion and that there was insufficient evidence of premeditation. The Arkansas Supreme Court declined to consider the directed-verdict argument because Smith presented evidence in his defense after the State rested. The court found substantial evidence supporting premeditation, noting Smith’s testimony and the nature of Foster’s fatal wound.Smith also argued that the State failed to disprove his justification defense. The court held that the jury was instructed on justification and was within its authority to reject Smith’s self-defense claim. The jury could reasonably conclude that shooting Foster in the back of the head was not justified. The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentences. View "SMITH v. STATE OF ARKANSAS" on Justia Law

Amber Dawn Waterman was charged in Benton County, Arkansas, with two counts of premeditated and deliberated capital murder for the deaths of Ashley Bush and her unborn child, Valkyrie Grace Willis. Waterman had previously pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri to kidnapping resulting in death and kidnapping resulting in the death of an unborn child. She was sentenced to two life sentences in federal court.In the Benton County Circuit Court, Waterman entered pleas of not guilty and former jeopardy, and filed a motion to dismiss based on double jeopardy under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-1-114 and the Arkansas Constitution. The circuit court denied her motion, finding that the state charges were not barred by double jeopardy.The Supreme Court of Arkansas reviewed the case and affirmed the circuit court's decision. The court held that the federal and state charges each required proof of different facts and were intended to prevent substantially different harms or evils. The federal charges required proof of kidnapping and interstate transport, while the state charges required proof of premeditated and deliberated intent to cause death. Therefore, the prosecution in Arkansas was not barred by Ark. Code Ann. § 5-1-114.Additionally, the court declined Waterman's request to interpret the Arkansas Constitution's double jeopardy provision more broadly than the federal provision, thereby upholding the dual sovereignty doctrine. The court concluded that the Arkansas Constitution does not prohibit Waterman’s state prosecution under these circumstances. The decision of the Benton County Circuit Court was affirmed. View "WATERMAN v. STATE OF ARKANSAS" on Justia Law

In 2018, Jodeci K. Norvel entered a negotiated guilty plea and received an eighteen-year sentence for battery in the first degree and possession of firearms by certain persons. His sentencing order included a note that he had two prior residential burglaries and should serve flat time. Norvel later filed a petition for declaratory judgment, injunctive relief, and a writ of mandamus, arguing that under Act 683 of 2023, he was eligible for parole because his sentencing order did not expressly designate that he was sentenced under the relevant statute.The Pulaski County Circuit Court granted Norvel’s petition, finding that Act 683 applied to him and that he was eligible for parole. The court determined that Norvel’s sentencing order did not contain an express designation under Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-93-609(b)(2)(B), as required by the statute.The Arkansas Supreme Court reviewed the case and affirmed the circuit court’s decision. The court held that the notation on Norvel’s sentencing order did not constitute an express designation that he was sentenced under section 16-93-609. The court emphasized that the statute requires a clear and unmistakable reference to the specific section, which was not present in Norvel’s sentencing order. The court also rejected the appellants’ argument that the circuit court’s interpretation of Act 683 led to absurd results contrary to legislative intent, citing its previous decision in Rodgers v. Arkansas Parole Board. Consequently, the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court’s order, granting Norvel the relief he sought. View "ARKANSAS POST-PRISON TRANSFER BOARD v. NORVEL" on Justia Law

On June 7, 2021, Sharmaine Atkinson took her two minor cousins to their aunt’s house, where they encountered Keundre Parker and three others. After returning to the house later, Atkinson heard Parker exclaim, “That’s the car,” followed by gunfire. Atkinson identified Parker as one of the shooters. The gunfire resulted in the death of one minor and injuries to others. Parker was charged with capital murder and four counts of aggravated assault.The Jefferson County Circuit Court denied Parker’s motion for a directed verdict, which argued that the identification was unreliable due to darkness. The court also denied Parker’s request for jury instructions on lesser-included offenses of manslaughter, negligent homicide, and first-degree assault, finding them unsupported by the facts. The jury convicted Parker on all charges, sentencing him to life in prison plus fourteen years.The Arkansas Supreme Court reviewed the case. Parker argued that there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions and that the circuit court erred in denying his requests for lesser-included-offense instructions. The court found that Atkinson’s testimony, corroborated by other evidence, provided substantial evidence to support the convictions. The court also held that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying the lesser-included-offense instructions, as the evidence did not support a rational basis for those instructions.The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, finding no prejudicial error in the record. View "PARKER v. STATE OF ARKANSAS" on Justia Law

Devon Romick was convicted by a jury of raping MV, a five-year-old minor, and was sentenced to life in prison. The incident occurred on July 12, 2023, when MV’s mother walked in on Romick sexually assaulting her daughter. MV’s mother immediately took MV to the police, and MV was later examined by a sexual assault nurse examiner (SANE nurse), Bethany Greene. Greene conducted two physical exams of MV, finding no remarkable physical evidence of abuse, which she explained was not unusual in child sexual abuse cases.The Crawford County Circuit Court heard the case, where MV’s mother and MV testified about the sexual assaults. Greene also testified about her examinations and findings. Romick objected to Greene’s testimony, arguing that it constituted improper expert testimony without her being certified as an expert.The Supreme Court of Arkansas reviewed the case. Romick’s appeal focused on the claim that the trial court erred by allowing Greene to give expert testimony without being certified as an expert. The Supreme Court found that Romick failed to contemporaneously object to most of Greene’s statements, preserving only one statement for review. The court held that Greene’s testimony about a 2009 study was permissible lay testimony under Arkansas Rule of Evidence 701, as it was rationally based on her perception and helpful to understanding her testimony.The court also concluded that even if Greene’s testimony was considered improper expert testimony, any error in admitting it was harmless given the overwhelming evidence of Romick’s guilt, including MV’s detailed testimony and Romick’s inconsistent statements. The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed Romick’s conviction and sentence. View "ROMICK V. STATE OF ARKANSAS" on Justia Law

Dennis Hale was convicted of raping his step-granddaughter, a minor, starting when she was eight years old. The abuse was reported by the victim to her teachers in September 2021, leading to Hale's arrest and charge in Sevier County. Initially represented by a public defender, Hale later had LaTonya Austin appointed as his attorney due to a conflict. Hale filed multiple pro se motions expressing his desire to represent himself, which the court eventually granted after multiple hearings and warnings about the risks of self-representation. Austin was appointed as standby counsel.The Sevier County Circuit Court found Hale guilty of rape based on the victim's detailed testimony and corroborating evidence, including items found during a search of Hale's property. Hale was sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed, arguing insufficient evidence, improper waiver of his right to counsel, and error in appointing Austin as standby counsel.The Arkansas Supreme Court reviewed the case. It held that the victim's testimony alone constituted substantial evidence to support the conviction, as corroborated by physical evidence. The court found that Hale knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel, having been repeatedly warned of the dangers of self-representation. The court also determined that Hale's conduct at trial did not prevent a fair and orderly exposition of the issues. Finally, the court ruled that there is no constitutional right to choose standby counsel, and Hale had agreed to Austin's appointment.The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed Hale's conviction and life sentence, finding no reversible errors in the proceedings. View "Hale v. State" on Justia Law

Jason Meredith was charged with two counts of capital murder for the shooting deaths of Eric Ogden and Lance Kelloms. The State agreed to waive the death penalty and reduce the charges to first-degree murder in exchange for Meredith's testimony against his co-defendant. Meredith pleaded guilty and received two concurrent life sentences. In 1998, he filed a pro se Rule 37 petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and new evidence. He later filed motions to amend his petition, which were denied by the circuit court.The Saline County Circuit Court denied Meredith's motions to amend his petition and ultimately dismissed his Rule 37 petition. The court found that Meredith failed to act with due diligence in seeking relief and that his petition did not comply with the length and formatting requirements. Additionally, the court concluded that the files and records showed Meredith was not entitled to relief, as he failed to demonstrate that his trial counsel was ineffective.The Supreme Court of Arkansas reviewed the case and affirmed the circuit court's decision. The court held that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying Meredith's motions to amend his petition, as the extreme passage of time and lack of diligence were considered. The court also affirmed the dismissal of the petition based on noncompliance with formatting requirements and the merits of the petition. The court found that Meredith did not sufficiently allege prejudice from his counsel's advice regarding parole eligibility, as he did not claim he would have insisted on going to trial but for the erroneous advice. View "Meredith v. State" on Justia Law

Bryant Smith was convicted in the Jefferson County Circuit Court of two counts of capital murder, one count of attempted capital murder, five counts of first-degree unlawful discharge of a firearm from a vehicle, one count of second-degree unlawful discharge of a firearm from a vehicle, six counts of terroristic act, and one count of unauthorized use of property to facilitate a crime. These charges stemmed from the deaths of a seventeen-year-old and a twenty-year-old, and the injury of another individual on September 3, 2020. Smith received a life sentence without the possibility of parole.The Jefferson County Circuit Court admitted evidence that Smith possessed a firearm when he was arrested, despite Smith's objections. The court also admonished a witness, Asia Holman, to tell the truth after she gave inconsistent testimony. Smith's motion to strike Holman's testimony was denied. The court ruled that Smith's prior convictions mandated life sentences for the noncapital Class Y felonies. Additionally, the court gave a nonmodel jury instruction that evidence of Smith's flight could be considered as evidence of guilt.The Arkansas Supreme Court reviewed the case and affirmed the lower court's decisions. The court held that substantial evidence supported Smith's convictions, including his own confession and corroborating evidence. The court found no abuse of discretion in admitting evidence of Smith's firearm possession, as it was relevant to the context of his flight and confession. The court also ruled that the circuit court's admonition to Holman was not an improper comment on the evidence and that the court did not err in refusing to strike her testimony. The court upheld the mandatory life sentences based on Smith's criminal history and found the nonmodel jury instruction on flight to be appropriate. Finally, the court determined that there was no error in the sentencing order that required correction. View "SMITH v. STATE OF ARKANSAS" on Justia Law

Dean Meacham was convicted of three counts of raping his minor daughter, referred to as MV, and was sentenced to three concurrent life sentences. MV disclosed the abuse at age thirteen, leading to Meacham's arrest and subsequent trial. Forensic evidence, including Meacham's semen on MV's bedsheets, supported the charges. Meacham appealed his convictions on four grounds, arguing that the circuit court erred in allowing certain testimonies and denying his motion for a mistrial.The Washington County Circuit Court denied Meacham's motion in limine to exclude evidence of him videoing MV naked in the shower, finding it admissible under the pedophile exception to Rule 404(b). At trial, the court overruled objections to testimonies from Debbee Deckard, a forensic interviewer, and Jessica Faamafi, MV's mother, regarding MV's disclosure of abuse and the video evidence. The court also denied Meacham's motion for a mistrial related to MV's reference to gender-identity issues during her testimony.The Supreme Court of Arkansas reviewed the case and affirmed the circuit court's decisions. The court held that Deckard's testimony was admissible as nonhearsay to show her course of conduct during the interview. Faamafi's testimony about the video was admissible under the pedophile exception to Rule 404(b), since it demonstrated Meacham's deviate sexual interest in MV. The court found that the probative value of this evidence outweighed any potential prejudice.Regarding the motion for a mistrial, the court determined that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion or in refusing to admonish the jury. The court concluded that MV's brief and incomplete statement about her gender identity did not prejudice Meacham. Consequently, the Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed Meacham's convictions and sentences. View "Meacham v. State" on Justia Law