Opinion ID: 1652510
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Stipulation to Exclude Evidence of Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts

Text: Davis argues that the circuit court erred in refusing to enforce a stipulation that he entered into with the State that no evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts would be offered in this case. The circuit court found that no stipulation existed and analyzed admission of evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts under Arkansas Rule of Evidence 404(b). The circuit court admitted some evidence and excluded other evidence. Davis concedes that the circuit court correctly determined admissibility of the evidence under Rule 404(b) but asserts that no evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts could be admitted due to the stipulation he reached with the State. Davis asserts that the stipulation was entered into at the oral argument on his motion to disclose evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts. The question presented then is whether Davis and the State entered into a stipulation that no evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts would be offered at trial. This court defined a stipulation in McClard v. Crain Management Group, Inc., 313 Ark. 472, 476, 855 S.W.2d 929, 931 (1993): A stipulation is a name given to any agreement made by the attorneys engaged on opposite sides of a cause (especially if in writing) regulating any matter incidental to the proceedings or trial, which falls within their jurisdiction. Black's Law Dictionary 1269 (5th ed.1979). The stipulations filed by McClard and Stacks were not signed by both sides. Absent agreement between the attorneys to stipulate, Freeway Ford was within its rights to supplement the record if appropriate. Thus, a stipulation may be made in writing. A stipulation can also be reached where both parties or their counsel appear before the court to make an oral stipulation official. See, e.g., Smith v. Washington, 340 Ark. 460, 10 S.W.3d 877 (2000). Davis's motion asked the State to disclose any evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts, and in oral argument the prosecutor stated it had no 404(b) evidence, [2] and did not intend to offer any. The circuit court then asked, Anything further on that motion ... ? Davis's counsel responded, No. While this statement by the prosecutor may be argued to be a representation to the circuit court of what evidence the State had that might be subject to Arkansas Rule of Evidence 404(b), and perhaps what evidence it intended to offer, it does not constitute an agreement with Davis that no evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts would be offered. Davis offers no other evidence that a stipulation was made. [3] A decision of the circuit court on whether the parties have a stipulated is a finding of fact reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard. See, e.g., City of Rockport v. City of Malvern, 356 Ark. 393, 155 S.W.3d 9 (2004) (finding of fact on a stipulation). A finding is clearly erroneous when, although there was evidence to support it, the appellate court after reviewing the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. R.M.W. v. State, 375 Ark. 1, 289 S.W.3d 46, 50 (2008). The circuit court found that the parties entered into no stipulation to exclude from trial all evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts. The circuit court was not clearly erroneous in reaching this decision. Thus, there was no error in the court analyzing what evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts was admissible, and again we note that Davis agrees that the evidence admitted was properly admitted under Ark. R. Evid. 404(b).