Case Name: Ray WADE v. Bob TOMLINSON, Sheriff of Lawrence County and ALL Others Similarly Situated
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Arkansas
Decision Date: 1985-01-21
Citations: 284 Ark. 432
Docket Number: CR 84-187
Parties: Ray WADE v. Bob TOMLINSON, Sheriff of Lawrence County and ALL Others Similarly Situated.
Judges: 
Reporter: Arkansas Reports
Volume: 284
Pages: 432–438

Head Matter:
Ray WADE v. Bob TOMLINSON, Sheriff of Lawrence County and ALL Others Similarly Situated.
CR 84-187
682 S.W.2d 751
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Opinion delivered January 21, 1985
Petitioner, Pro Se.
Steve Clark, Att’y Gen. by: Theodore Holder, Asst. Att’y Gen., for appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Ray Wade has petitioned for habeas corpus and certiorari which we granted in part to bring up the record. The record reflects that petitioner is in custody of the sheriff of Lawrence County under a charge of terroristic threatening in violation of Ark. S tat. Ann. § 41 -1608, having allegedly threatened to kill Helen Wade.
The State moved to commit the petitioner to the State Hospital for observation pursuant to Ark. Stat. Ann. § 43-1304, and when the petitioner refused to waive insanity as a defense, the circuit judge granted the motion. While that commitment was awaiting execution petitioner filed the habeas corpus petition. By amendment filed December 19, 1984, we are told petitioner has been transfered to the Arkansas State Hospital for nervous diseases pursuant to the order. Whether petitioner has been returned to the custody of the sheriff of Lawrence County is not diclosed.
Several lengthy petitions for habeas corpus and certiorari have been filed in this court subsequent to the issuance of the writ of certiorari to bring up the record, none of the state grounds for habeas corpus relief pursuant to Ark. Stat. Ann. § 34-1701 etseq. (Repl. 1962). The petitioner is in custody pursuant to a process which appears regular and valid on its face and the Circuit Court of Lawrence County has jurisdiction to try the petitioner on the charge pending against him. Mitchell v. State, 233 Ark. 578, 346 S.W.2d 201 (1961).
Assuming petitioner has been returned to Lawrence County he will doubtless be tried expeditiously or given another opportunity for a release on his own recognizance in accordance with A.R.Cr.P. Rule 5.1. We note that on November 1, 1984, the circuit judge pointedly gave petitioner that opportunity, but declined to release him because he refused to make a single, direct response to the court that he would appear for trial or hearing as directed. Rule 5.1(d) "Release on own recognizance" defines a release without bail as requiring the defendant to promise to appear at all appropriate times before the court. Unless petitioner is willing to give that assurance to the court, he is not entitles to release prior to trial other than by bail.
Petition denied.