State v. Newman, CR 03-1257.

Decision Date04 December 2003
Docket NumberNo. CR 03-1257.,CR 03-1257.
Citation132 S.W.3d 759,355 Ark. 265
PartiesSTATE of Arkansas v. Ricky Dale NEWMAN.
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Mike Beebe, Att'y Gen., by: Clayton K. Hodges, Ass't Att'y Gen., for petitioner.

No response.

PER CURIAM.

Ricky Dale Newman was convicted in the Crawford County Circuit Court of capital murder and sentenced to death.This court conducted an automatic review of the conviction and sentence, pursuant to Ark. R.App. P.-Crim. 10, and found no reversible error.SeeNewman v. State,353 Ark. 258, 106 S.W.3d 438(2003).Following issuance of the mandate, a hearing was held in the trial court, pursuant to Ark. R.Crim. P. 37.5(b), for the purpose of considering the appointment of an attorney to represent Newman in postconviction proceedings.

During this hearing, the trial judge advised Newman of his postconviction rights and his right to have an attorney to advise him on such rights.Newman stated that he wished to waive his right to an attorney and also his rights to pursue postconviction and habeas proceedings.When asked by the trial judge if he was under the influence of any drugs or alcohol, Newman replied: "I am under the influence of medication, yes."He then listed two medications that he was presently on, one of which is Thorazine.He later told the judge that the medication was for his mental health.The trial judge inquired as to whether Newman felt like the medication impaired his judgment, and Newman stated that it did not.The trial court entered an order finding that Newman had knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his rights.

The State has filed a petition asking this court to review the Rule 37.5 record and affirm the trial court's order.SeeState v. Roberts,354 Ark. ___, 123 S.W.3d 881(2003)(per curiam);State v. Riggs,340 Ark. 652, 12 S.W.3d 634(2000)(per curiam).Given Newman's statement that he was under the influence of medication at the time of the waiver hearing, we must deny the State's petition at this time and remand this matter to the trial court for the purpose of obtaining a mental-health evaluation of Newman.

We are aware, as was the trial judge, that Newman was previously evaluated by the Arkansas State Hospital prior to his trial, and that a competency hearing was held in June 2002, during which Dr. Charles Mallory opined that Newman was competent to stand trial.Because that evaluation is so remote in time from the waiver hearing, which occurred over one year later, we...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
  • Landers v. Jameson
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 4 Diciembre 2003
    ... ... State, 347 Ark. 334, 64 S.W.3d 272 (2002), the statute is not unconstitutional, as applied to it. He ... ...
  • Roberts v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 14 Febrero 2013
    ...of a recent mental-health evaluation for defendants who wish to waive their appeal or postconviction rights. In State v. Newman, 355 Ark. 265, 132 S.W.3d 759 (2003) (per curiam), this court was presented with the State's petition to review the record of Newman's waiver-of-postconviction-rel......
  • Newman v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 16 Enero 2014
    ...statement during the waiver hearing that he was under the influence of his medication, namely Thorazine. State v. Newman, 355 Ark. 265, 132 S.W.3d 759 (2003) (per curiam). Accordingly, we remanded the matter for the sole purpose of having the circuit court order the Arkansas State Hospital ......
  • Newman v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 5 Noviembre 2009
    ...statement during the waiver hearing that he was under the influence of his medication, namely Thorazine. See State v. Newman, 355 Ark. 265, 132 S.W.3d 759 (2003) (per curiam). Accordingly, we remanded the matter for the sole purpose of having the circuit court order the Arkansas State Hospi......
  • Get Started for Free

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