Lacy v. State, CR
| Decision Date | 20 April 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. CR,CR |
| Citation | 272 Ark. 333,614 S.W.2d 235 |
| Parties | Gary L. LACY, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. 80-190. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
C. W. Knauts, Piggott, and Oliver Cox, Corning, for appellant.
Steve Clark, Atty. Gen. by Jack W. Dickerson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, for appellee.
Gary L. Lacy's conviction for second degree murder and first degree battery must be reversed because his defense counsel was not timely furnished with a statement taken by the police from a critical witness.
Lacy killed Carl Eugene Adams and shot and wounded Vandal R. Durbin in a family fracas in Corning, Clay County, Arkansas. The killing occurred at the residence of Barbara Hall, a daughter of Adams. Lacy and his wife, Carolyn, were staying with the Halls. When Adams and two other men walked into the house, words were exchanged between Adams and Lacy. Lacy shot and killed Adams and wounded Durbin.
Lacy's defense was self defense. He testified that Adams called him a son-of-a-bitch and reached for a pistol in his back pocket; when Adams did that he shot him.
David Hensley, who was present at the house when the shooting occurred, was subpoenaed by the State several weeks before the trial but did not appear at the trial. When the defense discovered that Hensley was not present on the first day of the trial, the defense subpoenaed him. After a two-day trial and after the jury retired to deliberate, the defense moved for a continuance because Hensley was not present and because the State had not furnished the defense with a statement taken from Hensley. The prosecutor argued that he did not get the statement until late in the day of the second day. The statement was decidedly exculpatory. In it Hensley said that the door was kicked open by the three men; that Vandal slapped Barbara Hall; and that Adams loaded a gun and told the three men that if they "came back shooting" they would get "shot back." Hensley added that "Adams reached behind him and looked like he was going after a gun as he did have a handgun in his rear pocket."
The statement was contrary to the State's proof. Guthrie had testified that the door was open not kicked open; that Lacy simply shot Adams with no provocation; and that Adams had not reached for a gun. Durbin had testified that the door was simply opened and Adams did not have a weapon. Barbara Hall had testified that her father did not go for a gun.
The prosecuting attorney, in addition to arguing that he did not have Hensley's statement, also...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harmon v. State
...was not in the prosecutor's open file, the statement was imputed to the prosecution and disclosure was required." Lacy v. State , 272 Ark. 333, 335, 614 S.W.2d 235, 236 (1981). We also reversed and remanded for a new trial where, again, the State disclosed on the day of trial adverse testim......
-
Dumond v. State
...participated in the investigation or evaluation of the case. Thomerson v. State, 274 Ark. 17, 621 S.W.2d 690 (1981); Lacy v. State, 272 Ark. 333, 614 S.W.2d 235 (1981); and Williams v. State, 267 Ark. 527, 593 S.W.2d 8 (1979). So far as I am concerned the appellant was entitled to this pote......
-
Thomerson v. State, CR
...have reported to the prosecutor. See Commentary to Rule 17.1; Dupree v. State, 271 Ark. 50, 607 S.W.2d 356 (1980); and Lacy v. State, 272 Ark. 333, 614 S.W.2d 235 (1981). Appellant speculates here, however, that if tests had been made on various tangible items, they might be exculpatory in ......
-
Cotton v. State, CR
...stipulate that the victim suffered gunshot wounds. Ordinarily, photographs are admissible if they have any relevance. Lacy v. State, 272 Ark. 333, 614 S.W.2d 235 (1981); and Robinson v. State, 269 Ark. 90, 598 S.W.2d 421 (1980). In order for a photograph, asserted to be inflammatory, to be ......