Summary
The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed Kevin Lynn Davis Jr.'s convictions for capital murder and sentence of life without parole. The court rejected his claims concerning speedy trial, an alleged stipulation excluding other-acts evidence, competency proceedings, and a requested instruction on prior inconsistent statements.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the circuit court violated Davis's right to a speedy trial by excluding periods of delay under Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure 28.2 and 28.3.
- Whether the State and Davis entered into a stipulation barring the admission of all evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts.
- Whether the circuit court was required to hold a competency hearing after Davis underwent a mental evaluation.
- Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by refusing to give Arkansas Model Jury Instruction Criminal 202 concerning a prior inconsistent statement.
Holdings
- The circuit court did not violate Davis's right to a speedy trial because, after correcting the calculation of the mental-evaluation period, the properly excludable periods left 360 days between arrest and trial, within the twelve-month period allowed by Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 28.2.
- A defendant is not required to make a contemporaneous objection to a court-ordered exclusion of speedy-trial time when no hearing was held at which the defendant and counsel could object.
- The prosecutor's statement that the State had no 404(b) evidence and did not intend to offer any did not constitute a stipulation barring all evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts.
- The circuit court was not required to order a competency hearing sua sponte because the record did not establish reasonable doubt about Davis's competency to stand trial, and neither party contested the mental evaluation.
- The circuit court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to give Arkansas Model Jury Instruction Criminal 202 after the jury requested to review a witness's testimony because Davis did not request the instruction when the alleged inconsistent testimony was admitted or when the jury was instructed, and the witness's testimony about the material fact remained consistent.
Key quotations
“[T]his court has consistently and repeatedly held that a defendant is not required to bring himself to trial or `bang on the courthouse door' to preserve his right to a speedy trial; rather, the burden is on the courts and the prosecutors to see that trials are held in a timely fashion.” (167)
“Before a criminal defendant may be required to state a contemporaneous objection to the exclusion of time under speedy trial, the excludability of the period must be discussed "during a hearing where the defendant and his counsel were present."” (168)
Factual background
Davis was arrested for the killing of Patricia Young on November 3, 2005, and was tried for capital murder on June 27, 2007, 601 days later. The circuit court excluded several periods from the speedy-trial calculation, including time related to a mental evaluation, a crime-laboratory delay, and a continuance associated with the defense request for a three-day trial. At trial, a witness testified inconsistently about some details given to police but consistently stated that she saw Davis kill Young; the jury later requested to review her testimony.
Procedural history
Davis was arrested on November 3, 2005, and tried on June 27, 2007. The circuit court denied two motions to dismiss on speedy-trial grounds, admitted some evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts under Arkansas Rule of Evidence 404(b), declined to hold a competency hearing, and did not give the requested Arkansas Model Jury Instruction Criminal 202. The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed.