Court Opinion

ID: 9928937
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-01 17:02:38.338463+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:05:33.453139
License: Public Domain

Cite as 2024 Ark. 7
                SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
                                      No. CR-23-308

                                               Opinion Delivered:   February 1, 2024
 TERRICK NOONER
                              APPELLANT PRO SE APPEAL FROM THE SALINE
                                        COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
                                        [NO. 63CR-93-133]
 V.
                                               HONORABLE BRENT DILLON
 STATE OF ARKANSAS                             HOUSTON, JUDGE
                                 APPELLEE
                                               AFFIRMED.

                      COURTNEY RAE HUDSON, Associate Justice

       Appellant Terrick Nooner appeals from the Saline County Circuit Court’s dismissal

of his pro se motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated

section 16-90-111 (Repl. 2016). For reversal, Nooner argues that his sentence was illegal

because the aggravated-robbery charge should have been dismissed for lack of a speedy trial

pursuant to Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 28.1. We affirm.

       Nooner was found guilty by a Saline County jury of aggravated robbery and

sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed the conviction and sentence, and we affirmed.

Rockett v. State, 319 Ark. 335, 891 S.W.2d 366 (1995).1

       The circuit court’s decision to deny relief pursuant to section 16-90-111 will not be

overturned unless that decision is clearly erroneous. Millsap v. State, 2020 Ark. 38. Under

       1
        Robert L. Rockett was Nooner’s codefendant, and Rockett’s name appears first on
the direct-appeal published opinion.
section 16-90-111, a finding is clearly erroneous when, although there is 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 made. Id.

       Section 16-90-111(a) provides authority to a circuit court to correct an illegal

sentence at any time. Redus v. State, 2019 Ark. 44, 566 S.W.3d 469. An illegal sentence is

one that is illegal on its face. Id. A sentence is illegal on its face when it is void because it is

beyond the circuit court’s authority to impose and gives rise to a question of subject-matter

jurisdiction. Id. Sentencing is entirely a matter of statute in Arkansas. Id. The petitioner

seeking relief under section 16-90-111(a) carries the burden of demonstrating that his or her

sentence was illegal. Id. The general rule is that a sentence imposed within the maximum

term prescribed by law is not illegal on its face. McArty v. State, 2020 Ark. 68, 594 S.W.3d

54.

       Section 16-90-111(a) gives the circuit court authority to correct a facially illegal

sentence at any time. Dillon v. State, 2023 Ark. 78, 665 S.W.3d 235. However, the time

limitation for filing a petition under section 16-90-111(b)(1) alleging that the sentence was

imposed in an illegal manner has been superseded by the limitation period set forth in

Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 37.2(c). Id.

       Nooner claims that his sentence is illegal because he was tried and convicted in

violation of Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 28.1 when he was questioned and

eventually charged with aggravated robbery in Saline County while he was being held in

another county on a charge of theft by receiving. According to Nooner, the speedy-trial

calculation began to run when he was arrested for theft by receiving. Whether Nooner was

                                                 2
convicted in violation of Rule 28.1 is irrelevant because his speedy-trial allegation amounts

to a claim that his sentence was imposed in an illegal manner and therefore is barred by the

statute of limitations set forth in Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 37.2(c). Dillon, 2023

Ark. 78, 665 S.W.3d 235. Pursuant to Rule 37.2(c), Nooner had sixty days from the date

the mandate issued on direct appeal to file a petition alleging a speedy-trial violation. See

Harris v. State, 318 Ark. 599, 600, 887 S.W.2d 514, 515 (1994); see also Maxwell v. State,

298 Ark. 329, 767 S.W.2d 303 (1989).

       Nooner does not challenge the facial legality of the judgment, and his life sentence

for aggravated robbery does not exceed the maximum penalty for the offense. Aggravated

robbery is a Class Y felony offense. See Ark. Code Ann. § 5-12-103(b) (1987) (Act 620 of

1981, § 13). The maximum sentence for a Class Y felony is life. See Ark. Code Ann. § 5-

4-401 (1987) (Act 620 of 1981, § 8). Accordingly, Nooner’s petition to correct an illegal

sentence is barred by the statute and is otherwise without merit.

       Affirmed.

       Terrick T. Nooner, pro se appellant.

       Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Jason Michael Johnson, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.

                                              3