Case Title: Smith v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: cr96-684

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 1997-04-28T00:00:00Z

Document:
Danny SMITH v. STATE of Arkansas

CR 96-684                                          ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
                Opinion delivered April 28, 1997


1.   Attorney & client -- presentation of ineffective assistance of
     counsel claim on direct appeal -- claim not first presented to
     trial court not addressed on appeal. -- In order for a
     defendant to present an effective assistance of counsel claim
     on direct appeal, he must have first presented that claim to
     the trial court during the trial or in a motion for a new
     trial; appellant did neither and so his claim was not
     addressed.

2.   Witnesses -- general rule on collateral-matter impeachment --
     matter not collateral if relevant to show bias, knowledge, or
     interest. -- A witness cannot be impeached on a collateral
     matter by calling another witness to contradict the testimony
     of the first witness; however, a matter is not collateral if
     the evidence offered is relevant to show bias, knowledge, or
     interest; if a witness denies or does not fully admit the
     facts claimed to show bias, the attacker has a right to prove
     those facts by extrinsic evidence.  

3.   Witnesses -- appellant showed no bias on part of witness --
     trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding
     proffered testimony. -- Where the appellant offered no
     evidence showing bias on the witness's part, and failed to
     explore that issue on cross examination, but, instead,
     appellant merely sought to challenge the witness's denial that
     any charges were pending against him in Arkansas by offering
     the circuit clerk's testimony to the contrary, appellant
     failed to show any bias, knowledge, or interest on the
     witness's part; the trial court did not abuse its discretion
     in excluding appellant's proffer of the clerk's testimony.


     Appeal from Crawford Circuit Court; Don R. Langston, Judge;
affirmed.
     Thurman Ragar, Jr., for appellant.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  C. Joseph Cordi, Jr., Asst.
Att'y Gen., for appellee.

     Tom Glaze, Justice.
     Appellant Danny Smith was convicted of raping his seven-year-
old daughter, and was sentenced to thirty-five years' imprisonment. 
At trial, the State presented descriptive testimony of the rape and
medical proof confirming it, and Smith does not challenge that
evidence on appeal.  Instead, the two points he raises are, one,
his counsel provided ineffective assistance at trial because
counsel failed to advise him to testify, and two, the trial judge
erred in refusing to allow Smith to introduce extrinsic evidence to
challenge testimony given by a cellmate, Larry Green.
     Smith failed to preserve his first argument.  In order for a
defendant to present an ineffective assistance of counsel claim on
direct appeal, he must have first presented that claim to the trial
court during the trial or in a motion for a new trial.  Johnson v.
State, 325 Ark. 44, 924 S.W.2d 233 (1996); Missildine v. State, 314
Ark. 500,