Willie Gaster Davis, Jr. v. Wendy Kelley, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction; James DePriest, Legal Counsel, Arkansas Department of Correction; Leslie Rutledge, Arkansas Attorney General; Joyce Gooley, Mailroom Supervisor of Maximum Security; and Brandace Binns, Corporal Security of Maximum Security

Summary

The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of Willie Gaster Davis Jr.'s petition for a writ of mandamus and complaint for conversion concerning access to his crime-lab file. The court held that Davis failed to establish a clear and certain right to the entire file or a ministerial duty by the named defendants, and failed to state a conversion claim. The court also designated the appeal as a strike based on Davis's alteration of court documents.

Holdings

1. The Attorney General's voluntary appearance without objecting to insufficient service vested the circuit court with personal jurisdiction, and Davis's service argument was also unpreserved because it was not raised below.
2. Davis was not entitled to a writ of mandamus because he failed to show a clear and certain right to the entire crime-lab file and failed to identify a ministerial duty imposed on any of the appellees.
3. Davis failed to state a claim for conversion because he did not allege facts establishing a right to possess the crime-lab records.
4. The appeal was designated as a strike because Davis brought a malicious action by fraudulently altering court documents to misrepresent the scope of his earlier records request.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court had personal jurisdiction over the Attorney General despite allegedly insufficient service of process.
2. Whether the circuit court improperly dismissed the action before the expiration of the service deadline and before Davis could conduct discovery.
3. Whether Davis established a clear and certain right and a ministerial duty supporting mandamus to compel prison officials and the Attorney General to release the entire crime-lab file.
4. Whether Davis stated a claim for conversion based on confiscation of the crime-lab file.
5. Whether the circuit court's designation of the dismissal as a statutory strike should be disturbed and whether the appeal itself warranted a strike.

Disposition

affirmed