Gonder v. State
| Decision Date | 29 October 2015 |
| Docket Number | No. CR–15–439,CR–15–439 |
| Citation | 473 S.W.3d 21 |
| Parties | Duane Jefferson Gonder and Peggy Gonder, Appellants v. State of Arkansas, Appellee |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
In 2010, appellant Duane Jefferson Gonder entered a plea of guilty to first-degree murder, aggravated assault, and furnishing prohibited articles. He was sentenced to an aggregate term of 552 months' imprisonment.
In 2014, Peggy Gonder, who identified herself as Duane Jefferson Gonder's mother, filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in the trial court in Mr. Gonder's criminal case. In the petition, Ms. Gonder contended that the State in her son's case had violated Act 1262 of 1997, codified at Arkansas Code Annotated section 16–90–1107 (1997), which sets out the duty of law enforcement agencies to provide, if applicable, a preprinted document that provides certain information to the victim of a crime. In particular, she asserted that the State had erred by not advising her of her rights and by not hearing her "victim-impact statement." Ms. Gonder alleged that she was a victim inasmuch as Mr. Gonder had pleaded guilty to murdering her other son, Marcus Gonder. She argued that she was entitled to "exercise her feelings" when Mr. Gonder entered the plea and that Mr. Gonder "should have a choice to keep his plea or not." Ms. Gonder asked at the close of the mandamus petition that the trial court grant a hearing and order the State "to consider victim-impact statement and sentence recommendation."
On February 13, 2015, the trial court dismissed the petition for writ of mandamus on the grounds that the record showed that communication had existed between Ms. Gonder and the State and because mandamus would not lie to grant the relief sought. The trial court placed both Ms. Gonder's and Mr. Gonder's names on the order as parties to the mandamus petition,1 and, on March 13, 2015, Mr. Gonder alone filed a notice of appeal from the February 13, 2015 order.
Mr. Gonder lodged the appeal from the order in this court, and he now seeks to supplement the notice of appeal with Ms. Gonder's name. We dismiss the appeal.
It is clear from the contents of Ms. Gonder's petition for writ of mandamus that the intent of her petition was to challenge the judgment of conviction entered against Mr. Gonder on his plea of guilty. Even if she were, indeed, a victim of one of the offenses to which Mr. Gonder pleaded guilty, Ms. Gonder offered nothing to demonstrate that she was a party to the criminal case and had standing to challenge the plea. If there were some cause of action to be brought by Ms. Gonder concerning her treatment as a victim, that cause was not within Mr. Gonder's criminal case to vacate the plea.
Moreover, the trial...
To continue reading
Request your trial