Edwards v. Campbell
2010 Ark. 398
| Ark. | 2010Background
- Edwards, incumbent Mayor of Greenwood, sought reelection in 2010; he was previously convicted on February 25, 2009, of misdemeanor theft of property related to three campaign signs.
- The district judge found Edwards knowingly took signs with the purpose of depriving the owners, with no legal authority or justification.
- Garry Campbell filed a preelection challenge in September 2010, seeking declaratory relief, a writ of mandamus, and expedited review, alleging Edwards’ conviction rendered him ineligible under article 5, section 9 of the Arkansas Constitution.
- The circuit court held Edwards’ theft involved dishonesty, thus an infamous crime, and declared him ineligible to run and ordered votes for him not counted.
- Edwards appealed, arguing theft is not an infamous crime under article 5, section 9 and urging a case-by-case analysis; Campbell urged the opposite.
- On appeal, the court reaffirmed that theft constitutes an infamous crime under article 5, section 9 and affirmed the circuit court’s judgment and its order not to count Edwards’s votes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether misdemeanor theft is an 'infamous crime' under article 5, section 9. | Edwards argues theft is not inherently infamous and facts should govern; case-by-case. | Campbell contends theft involves dishonesty and is inherently infamous; a bright-line rule applies. | The court held theft is an infamous crime for eligibility purposes. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Oldner, 361 Ark. 316 (Ark. 2005) (infamous crimes involve deceit/dishonesty; guides interpretation of Art. 5, §9)
- Gaines v. Belding, 56 Ark. 100 (Ark. 1892) (calling a man a thief historically treated as larceny; infamous crime)
- Laughlin v. State, 316 Ark. 489 (Ark. 1994) (theft probative of dishonesty; impeachment context)
- Rhodes v. State, 276 Ark. 203 (Ark. 1982) (theft may be probative of dishonesty; Rule 608/609 context)
- James v. State, 274 Ark. 162 (Ark. 1981) (prior theft convictions admissible under Rule 609 as crimes involving dishonesty)
- State v. Oldner, 361 Ark. 323 (Ark. 2005) (discussion of noscitur a sociis and ejusdem generis in defining 'infamous crime')