State v. Hill, CR

Decision Date15 July 1991
Docket NumberNo. CR,CR
Citation811 S.W.2d 323,306 Ark. 375
PartiesSTATE of Arkansas, Petitioner, v. Jerry HILL, Respondent. 91-159.
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Sandy Moll, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, for petitioner.

John Wesley Hall, Little Rock, for respondent.

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI GRANTED

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner, State of Arkansas, requests a writ of certiorari on the basis that the trial court lacks the power to amend the charge of the Prosecuting Attorney of Faulkner County against the respondent, Jerry Hill, from theft of property (Ark.Code Ann. § 5-36-103 (1987) (a felony)) to theft of a trade secret (Ark.Code Ann. § 5-36-107 (1987) (a misdemeanor)).

The writ of certiorari is not one of right, but is to be granted or denied within the discretion of the court from which it is sought; certiorari may be granted where the court lacks the power to act as it has purported to do. Gran v. Hale, 294 Ark. 563, 745 S.W.2d 129 (1988).

In State v. Brooks, 301 Ark. 257, 783 S.W.2d 368 (1990), this court noted that the duty of charging an accused with a felony is reserved either to the grand jury or the prosecutor, Ark. Const. amend. 21, § 1; by amending the charge from a felony to a misdemeanor, in that case, over the State's objection, the trial court encroached upon the prosecutor's constitutional duties and breached the separation of powers doctrine. See also United States v. Edmonson, 792 F.2d 1492 (9th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1037, 107 S.Ct. 892, 93 L.Ed.2d 844 (1987); State v. Laury, 397 So.2d 960 (Fla.App.1981); Petition of United States, 306 F.2d 737 (9th Cir.1962).

Consequently, the trial court's amendment, in this case, of a felony charge to that of a misdemeanor impermissibly usurped the prosecutor's constitutional duties.

The petition for writ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • State v. D.S.
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • February 9, 2011
    ...v. Dawson, 343 Ark. 683, 693, 38 S.W.3d 319, 325 (2001)). We addressed an issue similar to the issue at hand in State v. Hill, 306 Ark. 375, 811 S.W.2d 323 (1991) (per curiam). In Hill, the trial court reduced the charge against the defendant from a felony to a misdemeanor. The State petiti......
  • Renfro v. State, CR
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • January 29, 1998
    ...State v. Murphy, 315 Ark. 68, 864 S.W.2d 842 (1993); Johnson v. State, 308 Ark. 7, 823 S.W.2d 800 (1992); State v. Hill, 306 Ark. 375, 811 S.W.2d 323 (1991) (per curiam). The prosecutor in this case made no attempt to amend the criminal information. It was the trial court that did so, in ef......
  • I.K. v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Court of Appeals
    • December 5, 2018
    ...State v. Knight , 318 Ark. 158, 884 S.W.2d 258 (1994) ; Simpson v. State , 310 Ark. 493, 837 S.W.2d 475 (1992) ; State v. Hill , 306 Ark. 375, 811 S.W.2d 323 (1991) ; State v. Brooks , 301 Ark. 257, 783 S.W.2d 368 (1990) ). Doing so invades the province of the prosecuting attorney who is pa......
  • State v. Brooks
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • February 3, 2005
    ...brought by the prosecuting attorney. State v. Knight, supra; Simpson v. State, 310 Ark. 493, 837 S.W.2d 475 (1992); State v. Hill, 306 Ark. 375, 811 S.W.2d 323 (1991); State v. Brooks, 301 Ark. 257, 783 S.W.2d 368 In Simpson v. State, 339 Ark. 467, 6 S.W.3d 104 (1999), this court held that ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT