Summary
The Arkansas Supreme Court reversed Chor J. Phavixay’s conviction for delivery of methamphetamine and remanded for a new trial. The court held that evidence of a prior controlled drug buy was not independently relevant under Arkansas Rule of Evidence 404(b), where identity and intent were not at issue, and therefore improperly suggested that Phavixay acted in conformity with a criminal character. Several justices dissented, arguing that the prior transaction was relevant to intent and identity.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether evidence of Phavixay's prior controlled drug buy was independently relevant and admissible under Arkansas Rule of Evidence 404(b).
- Whether the prior-transaction evidence should alternatively have been excluded under Arkansas Rule of Evidence 403 because of undue prejudice, waste of time, or confusion of the issues.
Holdings
- The prior controlled buy was not independently relevant to any material issue in the prosecution for the charged delivery of methamphetamine and therefore was inadmissible under Rule 404(b). Its admission improperly served to show that Phavixay was a drug dealer likely to have committed the charged offense.
Key quotations
“This court cannot perceive of any reason for the admission of Phavixay's prior drug transaction other than to show he was a drug dealer likely to have sold drugs again on the particular date for which he was tried. This is precisely the type of evidence that Rule 404(b) was designed to exclude.” (282 S.W.3d at 798)
Factual background
Phavixay was prosecuted for delivering methamphetamine during a controlled buy conducted on August 24, 2006, involving police informant Michael Bingham and Detective Darrell Craghead. The State also introduced evidence of a separate controlled buy involving Phavixay and Bingham on August 14, 2006. The two transactions were similar and occurred ten days apart, but the record did not show that identity was disputed or that the transactions involved a distinctive methodology.
Procedural history
The circuit court admitted evidence of a separate controlled buy from Phavixay ten days before the charged transaction, giving the jury a limiting instruction. Phavixay was convicted and timely appealed. The Court of Appeals certified the case to the Arkansas Supreme Court, which accepted certification, reversed, and remanded for a new trial.
Remand instructions
Remanded for a new trial.