Vaughn v. State, CR
| Decision Date | 12 May 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. CR,CR |
| Citation | 709 S.W.2d 73,289 Ark. 31 |
| Parties | Daryl VAUGHN, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. 85-224. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
William R. Simpson, Jr., Public Defender by Vicki J. Sandage, Deputy Public Defender, Little Rock, for appellant.
Steve Clark, Atty. Gen. by Theodore Holder, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, for appellee.
The owner of a grocery in Pulaski County was robbed on June 14, 1984, by the appellant Vaughn and an accomplice. The two men were captured within a few minutes, after the appellant had fired a pistol at an officer. Vaughn was charged as an habitual criminal with aggravated robbery, theft of property, attempted murder, and felon in possession of a firearm. The jury found Vaughn guilty of all the charges and sentenced him to life imprisonment for the aggravated robbery and to terms of years for the other three crimes. The severity of the sentences was presumably due to Vaughn's having ten prior convictions.
The only argument for reversal is that the court should have granted a defense motion for a mistrial on the ground that the trial judge, in identifying the lawyers for the jury panel, should not have mentioned that the defense attorney was from the Public Defender's Office. The theory is that the jurors might have inferred that Vaughn was indigent and likely to be a burden to society.
We think the objection to be speculative rather than practical. Jurors are ordinarily reasonably well-informed men and women. They know that indigency is widespread in this nation, as indicated by poverty programs, food stamps, public defenders, Medicaid, Salvation Army appeals, charitable drives, and countless other activities that daily attest the existence of indigence in the country and in Pulaski County. The probability that a jury's verdict in a case like this one would be affected by a remark such as the one complained of is insignificant. If defense counsel wanted the matter to be kept from the jury, he should have made his objection known to the judge before the trial began.
A similar point seems to have arisen in only three cases. In two of them the defense counsel himself told the jury that he was court appointed. Of course there was no objection, but in both instances the appellate court observed that the practice is not a good one. United States v. Naylor, 566 F.2d 942 (5th Cir.1978); Sanders v. State, 429 So.2d 245 (Miss.1983). The third case is somewhat similar to the case...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gunter v. State
...to give an admonitory instruction is not prejudicial error in the absence of a request for such an instruction. Vaughan v. State, 289 Ark. 31, 709 S.W.2d 73 (1986). Because no curative relief was requested at trial, no issue is preserved on For the reasons stated, the judgment is affirmed. ...
-
People v. James
...jury's verdict in a case like this one would be affected by a remark such as the one complained of is insignificant. Vaughn v. State, 289 Ark. 31, 709 S.W.2d 73, 74 (1986); see also Landreth v. State, 331 Ark. 12, 960 S.W.2d 434, 439 (1998)(mistrial not required because prosecutor referred ......
-
Dixon v. Salvation Army
...309, 780 N.E.2d 781 (2002). It collects and sells donated items to raise money to pay for its operations. See, e.g., Vaughn v. State, 289 Ark. 31, 709 S.W.2d 73 (1986). However, the Salvation Army is not in the business of selling used items. Rather it sells used items to pay in part for it......
-
Burkhart v. State
...Ark. 178, 747 S.W.2d 112 (1988). If there is no request that the jury be admonished it is not error to fail to do so. Vaughn v. State, 289 Ark. 31, 709 S.W.2d 73 (1983). The unfair prejudice, if any, resulting from the prosecutor's remark was not so drastic as to warrant a mistrial, and the......