Douglas v. State, 2017 Ark. 70

In August 2015, Courtney Jarrell Douglas went to Terrance Billings’s home after an earlier dispute; an altercation on Billings’s front porch ended when Douglas shot and killed Billings.
A Union County jury convicted Douglas of first-degree murder and possession of a firearm by certain persons. He received life imprisonment plus 15 years for firearm use, and 40 years plus a $15,000 fine on the firearms count.
Douglas moved for a new trial, arguing that court security prevented family members from entering the courtroom during voir dire, violating his right to a public trial.
Douglas also requested jury instructions on extreme-emotional-disturbance manslaughter and justification, but his counsel proffered an incorrect instruction and did not properly request the correct ones at trial.
The circuit court held an evidentiary hearing, reviewed surveillance video, found the family members’ testimony not credible, concluded there was no closure of the courtroom, and denied the new-trial motion; it also declined to give the unproffered instructions.
The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed, finding the closure issue preserved and without reversible error, and holding the instruction claims were not preserved and did not meet narrow Wicks exceptions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether denial of courtroom entry to family during voir dire violated defendant's Sixth Amendment public-trial right	Douglas argued court security barred family members from voir dire, causing a (constitutional) closure warranting a new trial	State argued issue was not preserved because no contemporaneous objection and the record shows no closure	Court found issue preserved (no knowing waiver), but after deference to factfinder held there was no courtroom closure; denial of new trial affirmed
Whether failure to give manslaughter (extreme emotional disturbance) and justification instructions warrants reversal	Douglas argued those instructions were required by the evidence	State argued defendant’s counsel proffered wrong instruction and failed to properly object/proffer correct instructions at trial	Court held error not preserved because counsel failed to proffer correct instructions and Wicks exceptions do not apply

Holloway v. State, 363 Ark. 254, 213 S.W.3d 633 (Ark. 2005) (standard for review of motion for new trial and deference to trial-court credibility determinations)
Walton v. Briley, 361 F.3d 431 (7th Cir. 2004) (public-trial right may be waived only knowingly and voluntarily)
Strom v. State, 348 Ark. 610, 74 S.W.3d 233 (Ark. 2002) (trial-court factual findings not reversed unless clearly erroneous)
Johnson v. State, 2015 Ark. 387, 472 S.W.3d 486 (Ark. 2015) (deference to trial court on witness credibility)
Willis v. State, 334 Ark. 412, 977 S.W.2d 890 (Ark. 1998) (requirement that counsel object and proffer jury instructions to preserve error)
Wicks v. State, 270 Ark. 781, 606 S.W.2d 366 (Ark. 1980) (narrow exceptions to contemporaneous-objection rule for jury instructions)
Rackley v. State, 371 Ark. 438, 267 S.W.3d 578 (Ark. 2007) (third Wicks exception applied only for flagrant, highly prejudicial error)