Baugh v. State, CR
| Decision Date | 25 February 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. CR,CR |
| Citation | 256 Ark. 64,505 S.W.2d 519 |
| Parties | Danny BAUGH, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. 73--160. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
E. W. Brockman, Jr., of Brockman, Brockman & Gunti, Pine Bluff, for appellant.
Jim Guy Tucker, Atty. Gen., by Alston Jennings, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, for appellee.
The appellant was charged with driving while intoxicated, the second such offense within a year, was found guilty by the jury, and was fined $250. Ark.Stat.Ann. §§ 75--1027 and 75--1029 (Repl.1957 and Supp.1973). He is correct in his contention that the trial court erred in allowing the jury to be told, before they considered the issue of guilt or innocence, that a second offense was involved. We so held in an identical case, Francis v. City of Benton, 240 Ark. 738, 401 S.W.2d 729 (1966).
We cannot, however, sustain the appellant's further argument that the charge should be dismissed because there is no such crime as 'driving while intoxicated, second offense.' Even though the jury should not initially be told about that aspect of the case, the accused cannot complain about the reference in the information to a second offense. Quite the contrary, it is essential that the State make that fact known to the accused, so that he may have an opportunity to dispute the assertion of a prior conviction. The information in the case at...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Finch v. State, CR77-149
...upon which the state relies for assessment of punishment and to give him the opportunity to refute such assertions. Baugh v. State, 256 Ark. 64, 505 S.W.2d 519; Robbins v. State, supra; Switzer v. Golden, Appellant contends that the trial court erred in allowing the state to amend its infor......
-
Baumgarner v. State
...is to give the defendant notice of the essential elements the State relies upon to assess punishment. Id; see also Baugh v. State, 256 Ark. 64, 505 S.W.2d 519 (1974). It is well settled that an information may be amended up to a point after a jury has been sworn if it does not change the na......
- Gibson v. State