State of Arkansas v. Phillip Ray Nichols, Trudy Lynn Nichols, and Dale Christopher Scamardo, 364 Ark. 1

Summary

The Arkansas Supreme Court dismissed the State's interlocutory appeal from an order suppressing evidence obtained after a warrantless entry into the appellees' home. The court held that the appeal turned on fact-specific and mixed questions concerning exigent circumstances and witness credibility, rather than on an issue requiring interpretation of criminal law with widespread ramifications. Accordingly, the appeal was not permissible under Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure–Criminal 3.

Holdings

1. The State's appeal was not appealable because resolution of the challenge to the suppression order depended on the particular facts of the case and did not involve interpretation of a rule or statute requiring review for the correct and uniform administration of criminal law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the State's interlocutory appeal from the order suppressing evidence was permissible under Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure–Criminal 3.
2. Whether the appeal presented an issue involving interpretation of a criminal rule or statute with widespread ramifications, rather than a fact-specific application of exigent-circumstances doctrine.

Disposition

dismissed