Case Title: Reece v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: CR96-81

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 1996-09-16T00:00:00Z

Document:
Reginald REECE v. STATE of Arkansas

CR 96-81                                           ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
              Opinion delivered September 16, 1996


1.   Appeal & error -- sentencing argument raised for first time on
     appeal -- argument not considered. -- Appellant's argument
     that his sentence of forty years' imprisonment constituted
     cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment to the
     United States Constitution was not reached by the court
     because appellant made no objection at the time his sentence
     was imposed; where the record reflects a total absence of any
     objections after the jury's findings and sentencing are read
     by the court, issues of such nature will not be considered
     when raised for the first time on appeal; even constitutional
     arguments not raised before the trial court will not be
     considered on appeal.  

2.   Criminal procedure -- criminal defendant has right to be
     present whenever substantial step is taken in his case -- when
     his presence is considered waived. -- A criminal defendant
     possesses the privilege of being present in person and by
     counsel whenever any substantial step is taken in his case,
     and if the indictment is for a felony, the defendant must be
     present during the trial; however, where the defendant is on
     bail and absents himself, the trial may proceed; this rule
     applies once trial has commenced, and does not apply to flight
     before trial; commencement of trial marks the point at which
     the costs of delaying the proceedings are likely to increase
     and helps to assure that any waiver of presence after that is
     knowing and voluntary. 

3.   Criminal procedure -- appellant's trial had commenced before
     he became voluntarily absent -- no error in trial court
     allowing appellant's trial to proceed. -- Where appellant's
     trial had commenced when he became voluntarily absent, a jury
     had been selected and sworn, and both sides had announced that
     they were ready for trial, the trial court did not err in
     allowing appellant's trial to proceed.


          Appeal from Miller Circuit Court; Jim Gunter, Judge;
affirmed.
     Keil & Goodson, by:  John C. Goodson, for appellant.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  Kent G. Holt, Asst. Att'y
Gen., for appellee.

     Bradley D. Jesson, Chief Justice.
     The appellant, Reginald Reece, was convicted of robbery and
sentenced as an habitual offender to forty years' imprisonment.  He
raises two points on appeal, neither of which has merit.  We affirm
the trial court.
     The State adduced the following proof at trial.  Ramona
Johnson, a security guard at the Wal-Mart store on State Line Road
in Texarkana, followed the appellant into the store when it opened
on December 10, 1994.  She recognized the appellant because she had
caught him shoplifting cigarettes earlier in July and had banned
him from the premises.  
     Once inside, Johnson followed appellant and observed him stuff
two cartons of Marlboro cigarettes down his pants.  When appellant
passed the checkout counter and attempted to walk out the door,
Johnson stopped and confronted him.  Initially, appellant denied
having any cigarettes on his person, but later admitted to having
them, explaining that he had brought the cartons from home. 
Johnson then took appellant's arm and escorted him to the service
desk.  After appellant pushed Johnson in the chest, other Wal-Mart
employees gathered and ushered him to a back room pursuant to the
store's customary practice.  Appellant cursed and fought with them
along the way, grabbing one employee's necktie.  Once in the back
room, the appellant challenged one to a fight.  The employees held
appellant until officers arrived.  In his statement to police,
appellant admitted that he went into the store with the intention
of stealing the cigarettes, but denied using any force during the
incident.    
     Appellant first argues that his sentence of forty years'
imprisonment under the facts in his case constitutes cruel and
unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment to the United States
Constitution.  We cannot reach this issue because appellant made no
objection at the time his sentence was imposed. See Fellows v.
State, 309 Ark. 545, 832 S.W.2d 847 (1992).  We have repeatedly
held that, where the record reflects a total absence of any
objections after the jury's findings and sentencing are read by the
court, we will not consider issues of such nature raised for the
first time on appeal. Id.; Williams v. State, 303 Ark. 193,