Walker v. State, CR
| Decision Date | 06 July 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. CR,CR |
| Citation | 637 S.W.2d 528,276 Ark. 434 |
| Parties | James Dean WALKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. 82-22. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Lessenberry & Carpenter by Thomas M. Carpenter, Little Rock, for appellant.
Steve Clark, Atty. Gen. by William C. Mann, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, for appellee.
After a trial by jury appellant, James Dean Walker, was convicted of felony escape and sentenced to two years in the Arkansas Department of Correction, with the sentence to run consecutively to any sentence then being served. On appeal from this conviction the only issue is whether the trial court erred in instructing the jury pursuant to AMCI 6004, the instruction for deadlocked juries. We affirm.
The jury was given the case on the afternoon of October 19, 1981, but had still not reached a verdict after approximately four hours of deliberation. At that time the court asked the foreman how the jury stood in its voting. The foreman responded that it was nine to three. The court then gave the jury an instruction commonly known as the "Allen charge" which is essentially set out in AMCI 6004. In giving the instruction the court added the sentence emphasized below to the AMCI version:
It is to the interest of the State of Arkansas and of the defendant(s) for you to reach an agreement in this case, if at all possible. A hung jury means a continuation of the case and a delay in the administration of justice. And it also means additional expense on the taxpayers.
You should consider that this case will have to be decided by some jury and, in all probability, upon the same testimony and evidence. It is unlikely that the case will ever be submitted to 12 people more intelligent, more impartial, or more competent to decide it....
The instruction then goes on to tell the jury that they should weigh and discuss the evidence and make every reasonable effort to harmonize individual views on the merits of the case. It also states that no juror should surrender his sincere convictions to reach a verdict and that the verdict should be the result of each juror's free and voluntary opinion, but that every sincere effort should be made to reach a proper verdict. After hearing this instruction the jury continued their deliberation but were unable to reach a verdict until the next morning.
Appellant objects to the sentence added by the court for two reasons: (1) the sentence is extraneous to issues of guilt or innocence or punishment; and (2) modification of the instruction should not have been made without the trial judge setting out in writing the reason for not giving the AMCI version.
In regard to instructing the jury on extraneous matter we held in Evans v. State, 252 Ark. 335, 478 S.W.2d 874 (1972) that:
An admonition to the jury as to its duty to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Davis v. State
...the trial court gave the Allen instruction. It is well-settled that a trial court may give the Allen instruction. Walker v. State, 276 Ark. 434, 637 S.W.2d 528, cert. denied, 459 U.S. 975, 103 S.Ct. 310, 74 L.Ed.2d 289 (1982). In Walker, this court stated that it is not error to instruct th......
-
Russell v. State
...which stresses the importance of reaching a verdict and the monetary and social costs of delayed justice. See Walker v. State , 276 Ark. 434, 637 S.W.2d 528 (1982). By comparison, the court's communication here was—despite Russell's characterization to the contrary—an utterly unremarkable a......
-
Phillips v. State, CR–14–499
...point on appeal, it is well settled that a trial court may give the Allen instruction rather than granting a mistrial. Walker v. State, 276 Ark. 434, 637 S.W.2d 528, cert. denied, 459 U.S. 975, 103 S.Ct. 310, 74 L.Ed.2d 289 ...
-
Miller v. State, CR
...It is argued this was error. This instruction has been approved before and we do not overrule our prior decisions. Walker v. State, 276 Ark. 434, 637 S.W.2d 528 (1982). Some other of the usual arguments made in death cases are perfunctorily It is argued that the findings regarding pecuniary......