Court Opinion

ID: 9684378
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 13:55:15.31293+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:55.315510
License: Public Domain

Tom Glaze, Justice, concurring. The majority opinion ce, correctly followed this court’s precedent in affirming the trial court’s dismissal of Mr. Arnell Willis’s election-contest complaint. The majority opinion reviews election-contest cases that emphasize that the Election Code was designed to resolve election disputes expeditiously. For these reasons, I am compelled to join the majority’s decision. What disturbs me are the serious allegations made by Mr. Willis, but, as the result of a procedural bar, he will be unable to offer proof as to their validity. Mr. Willis has alleged that illegal and fraudulent votes were cast for his opponent, Barbara King. He specified the names of persons who voted twice, persons who voted, although they were not registered, and persons who were involved in fraudulent absentee voting. Mr. Willis will not be able to prove these charges in this election-contest proceeding. However, I point out that, while Mr. Willis may not now present his case, the Phillips County Clerk, Linda White, in her answer to Willis’s complaint, admitted that, according to her records, the persons listed in paragraph 6 of the complaint may have voted twice.1 She also admitted that the ten persons listed in the complaint had voted without being registered. The three Phillips County Board of Election Commissioners made the same admissions. When there are serious allegations of election irregularities and fraud, there should be a remedy available (in addition to a candidate’s election-contest procedures) to investigate and determine if such charges are valid. Too often election contests by candidates are lost due to expedited, complex rules that make up our Election Code. While the Code contains penalties for misdemeanor and felony election offenses, Ark. Code Ann. §§ 7-1-103 and 7-1-104 (Supp. 2001), respectively, such violations are commonly not investigated or charged. The General Assembly should address this problem and provide a remedy that is not burdened with time constraints almost impossible to meet. The Election Code does provide a remedy set out in Ark. Code Ann. § 7-5-807(a) (Repl. 2000), whereby ten reputable citizens of any county may file a complaint in circuit court within twenty days after the election, alleging that illegal or fraudulent votes were cast. The circuit court judge, if in his opinion there is good ground to believe the charges to be true, shall convene a grand jury. Although the time limitation of twenty days after the election may be too short, the General Assembly could rectify that problem by lengthening the filing deadline and making other revisions which would make the law more effective and available to the voters. Allegations such as the ones being sworn to here should be resolved so that Arkansas voters can be assured that their elections are honest, but, when not, the voters are availed a remedy by which they can root out illegal and fraudulent voting practices.   Ms. White denied that she did not determine whether the persons voted twice.