Case Title: State v. Rice

Citation: 

Docket Number: CR97-301

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 1997-06-23T00:00:00Z

Document:
STATE of Arkansas v. Leon Jackson RICE

CR 97-301                                          ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
                 Opinion delivered June 23, 1997


1.   Appeal & error -- State allowed to appeal -- when supreme court accepts
     State appeals. -- Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure--Criminal
     3(b) allows the State to appeal following a felony or
     misdemeanor prosecution; additionally, under Ark. R. App. P.--
     Crim. 3(c), the attorney general must inspect the record and
     be satisfied that error has prejudiced the State and that the
     correct and uniform administration of the criminal law
     requires appellate review; pursuant to the rule, the supreme
     court accepts appeals by the State when a holding will set a
     precedent that would be important to the correct and uniform
     administration of justice.

2.   Appeal & error -- State's appeal from dismissal of revocation petition
     dismissed. -- The State may not appeal from the dismissal of a
     petition to revoke a felon's probation under Ark. R. App. P.--
     Crim 3; the supreme court dismissed the State's appeal from
     the dismissal of the revocation petition.

3.   Appeal & error -- State's appeal from dismissal of felony charge implicated
     correct and uniform administration of criminal law -- review required. --
     The supreme court has accepted State's appeals generally
     involving double jeopardy issues; the court determined that
     the State's appeal from the dismissal of appellee's felony
     charge implicated and fostered the correct and uniform
     administration of the criminal law by proceeding with a double
     jeopardy analysis of the application of the controlled-
     substances forfeiture statute, Ark. Code Ann.  5-64-505
     (Repl. 1993), in this case.

4.   Constitutional law -- Double Jeopardy Clause -- forfeiture action was civil
     in nature and did not constitute punishment -- trial court erred in
     finding that forfeiture barred subsequent prosecution on possession charge.
     -- The supreme court concluded that there was little evidence
     suggesting that the forfeiture proceeding against appellee's
     vehicle was so punitive in form and effect so as to render the
     proceeding criminal; moreover, Ark. Code Ann.  5-64-505, as
     applied, was not used as a criminal penalty; the State brought
     the action under the in rem portion of the statute, and the
     action was brought against appellee's vehicle; in sum, the
     forfeiture action was civil in nature and did not constitute
     "punishment" for purposes of double jeopardy; the supreme
     court held that the trial court erred in finding that the
     forfeiture barred appellee's subsequent prosecution on a
     possession charge.

5.   Constitutional law -- Double Jeopardy Clause -- trial court's dismissal on
     double jeopardy grounds was not acquittal -- order dismissing possession
     charge reversed and remanded. -- Because the supreme court
     concluded that the trial court erred in dismissing the felony
     charge, it addressed appellee's contention that the Double
     Jeopardy Clause barred a remand of the case; the trial court's
     dismissal of the charge on double jeopardy grounds was not an
     acquittal on that charge; the supreme court has previously
     reversed and remanded where the trial court erroneously
     dismissed charges on double jeopardy grounds; accordingly, it
     reversed the trial court's order dismissing the charge of
     possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute
     and remanded for further proceedings.


     Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, First Division; Marion
Humphrey, Judge; dismissed in part; reversed and remanded in part.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  Gil Dudley, Asst. Att'y Gen.,
for appellant.
     William R. Simpson, Jr., Public Defender, by:  Deborah R.
Sallings, Deputy Public Defender, for appellee.

     Annabelle Clinton Imber, Justice.
     The State has appealed the trial court's dismissal, on double
jeopardy grounds, of a felony charge and a revocation petition.  We
dismiss the appeal involving the revocation petition, and reverse
and remand finding that the trial court erroneously dismissed the
felony charge.  
     On July 16, 1995, Leon Jackson Rice was pulled over during a
traffic stop.  The investigating officer arrested Rice for
possession of a controlled substance.  On August 31, 1995, the
State filed a civil in rem forfeiture action against Rice's seized
vehicle pursuant to Ark. Code Ann.  5-64-505(a)(6) (Repl. 1993). 
The case was filed in Pulaski County circuit court and styled
"State of Arkansas, Petitioner, vs. One 1985 Chevrolet Caprice VIN
#IN69JAJ111615, Defendant, Leon Rice, Potential Claimant."  On
January 26, 1996, the State obtained a default judgment in the
forfeiture action.
     On September 26, 1995, the State filed an information against
Rice charging him with possession of a controlled substance with
intent to deliver.  On November 28, 1995, the State filed an
amended petition for revocation alleging that Rice violated the
terms of his prior probationary sentence due to his drug
possession.
     Rice filed a motion to dismiss the charge and the revocation
petition on double jeopardy grounds, arguing that the civil
forfeiture of his vehicle was punishment barring further criminal
prosecution.  The trial court granted the motion to dismiss, and
the State now appeals the order, arguing that the trial court
erroneously determined that double jeopardy barred the prosecution
and revocation.

1.  Appellate Jurisdiction -- Appeal from Dismissal of Petition 
for Revocation.

     Rice essentially concedes the merits of the case, but instead
argues that this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the State's
appeal.  Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure--Criminal 3(b)
(formerly codified as Ark. R. Crim. P. 36.10(b)) allows the State
to appeal following a felony or misdemeanor prosecution. 
Additionally, the attorney general must inspect the record and be
satisfied that error has prejudiced the State, and that the correct
and uniform administration of the criminal law requires our review. 
Ark. R. App. P.--Crim. 3(c).  Pursuant to the rule, this court
accepts appeals by the State "when our holding will set a precedent
that would be important to the correct and uniform administration
of justice."  State v. Townsend, 314 Ark. 427,