Owens v. Taylor, 88-322
| Decision Date | 03 July 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-322,88-322 |
| Citation | 772 S.W.2d 596,299 Ark. 373 |
| Parties | James Lee OWENS, Petitioner, v. H.A. TAYLOR, Judge, Respondent. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Griffin J. Stockley, Little Rock, for petitioner.
J. Denahmmcclendon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, for respondent.
James Owens seeks a writ of prohibition against the Honorable H.A. Taylor, Circuit Judge of Jefferson County, Arkansas, asserting that the circuit court has no subject matter jurisdiction to impose conditions on Owens's release from the Arkansas State Hospital. We ordered a temporary stay in the proceedings below so that briefs could be submitted. Having considered the arguments, we grant the writ.
Owens was charged on March 23, 1987, with second degree battery. While resisting arrest he drew a straight razor from his shoe and in the struggle with the officers Owens sustained several cuts, none severe.
On the day after his arrest, Owens was sent to the state hospital for evaluation and on April 20, 1987, the circuit court found, based on a report from the hospital, that Owens lacked the capacity to stand trial. He was then committed for treatment.
The record is entirely silent as to the events of the next thirteen months, but on May 25, 1988, Dr. Wanda Stephens, Staff Psychiatrist, wrote the circuit judge expressing the position of the hospital, i.e., that unless an order of civil commitment were entered by a probate court, circuit court jurisdiction over James Owens ended after one year.
Next, Dr. Stephens wrote in September to the Mental Health Magistrate, Ms. Elizabeth McCord, to state that Owens was fit to proceed and, with further treatment, should be able to cooperate with his attorney by January of 1989.
On November 9, 1988, the circuit court, citing a November 1, 1988, report from another staff psychiatrist, Dr. James McDaniel, stating that Owens lacked the capacity to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law at the time of the alleged offense, declared that Owens should be acquitted by reason of insanity pursuant to the provisions of Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-315 (1987). 1
On December 1, 1988, Dr. Stephens again wrote the circuit judge to advise that Owens was no longer regarded as a threat to himself or to others and would be released in approximately ten days. On that same day, the administrator of Rogers Hall at the hospital wrote to the circuit judge to request conditional release of Owens and on December 7 the prosecuting attorney petitioned for Owens's conditional release. A hearing was scheduled on that petition for January and at that point this court ordered a temporary stay in those proceedings.
The state maintains that because Owens was released unconditionally by the state hospital on January 11, 1989, any justiciable issue is rendered moot. General Publishing Co., Inc. v. Erxleben, 283 Ark. 136, 671 S.W.2d 182 (1984). Ordinarily, mootness resolves the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kelley v. Johnson
...future litigation are present,” this court may, at its discretion, “elect to settle an issue, even though moot.” Owens v. Taylor, 299 Ark. 373, 374, 772 S.W.2d 596, 597 (1989). We discuss each issue in turn.4 A. Procedural Due Process In their amended complaint, the Prisoners asserted that ......
-
Protect Fayetteville v. City of Fayetteville
...of the controversy between the parties. See Nathaniel v. Forrest City Sch. Dist. No. 7 , 300 Ark. 513, 780 S.W.2d 539 (1989) ; Owens , 299 Ark. 373, 772 S.W.2d 596 ; Cummings v. Washington Cty. Election Comm'n , 291 Ark. 354, 724 S.W.2d 486 (1987) ; Robinson v. Ark. State Game & Fish Comm'n......
-
Trujillo v. State
...judgment enforcement statutes was a substantial question that merited review despite mootness of actual controversy); Owens v. Taylor, 299 Ark. 373, 772 S.W.2d 596 (1989) (holding a substantial issue remained, despite mootness, as to whether conditions could be imposed on a defendant's rele......
-
Cotten v. Fooks
...judgment enforcement statutes was a substantial question that merited review despite mootness of actual controversy); Owens v. Taylor, 299 Ark. 373, 772 S.W.2d 596 (1989) (holding a substantial issue remained, despite mootness, as to whether conditions could be imposed on a defendant's rele......