Duane Gonder v. Tim Griffin, Arkansas Attorney General

Summary

The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed the dismissal of Duane Gonder’s petition challenging Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-54-119(a) as unconstitutional as applied to inmates. The court held that Gonder lacked standing and failed to present a justiciable controversy because his alleged risk of prosecution was hypothetical and speculative. The court also held that the appealed dismissal without prejudice converted to a dismissal with prejudice and upheld the imposition of a strike; a pending motion for decision on the appellant’s brief alone was rendered moot.

Holdings

1. Gonder lacked standing because he did not allege that he personally suffered a present injury from application of section 5-54-119(a); his claimed risk of future prosecution was hypothetical and speculative, and he could not assert the constitutional rights of other inmates.
2. Gonder failed to present a justiciable controversy because he alleged no present harm and relied on the speculative possibility that he or other inmates would be prosecuted under the furnishing provision rather than another potentially applicable offense.
3. Because Gonder elected to appeal the dismissal without prejudice and the judgment was affirmed, the dismissal converted to a dismissal with prejudice.
4. The circuit court did not err in imposing a strike because Gonder failed to state a cause of action for declaratory and injunctive relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Gonder had standing to bring an as-applied constitutional challenge to Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-54-119(a).
2. Whether Gonder alleged a justiciable controversy ripe for declaratory and injunctive relief.
3. Whether the circuit court properly dismissed the petition and imposed a strike.
4. Whether the dismissal without prejudice converted to a dismissal with prejudice after Gonder appealed.
5. Whether Gonder's motion for a decision based on his brief alone was moot.

Disposition

affirmed