Glaze v. State
2011 Ark. App. 283
Ark. Ct. App.2011Background
- Glaze charged with felon-in-possession of a firearm and aggravated assault; amended information sought habitual-criminal enhancement.
- Amended information filed July 13, 2010 to add section 16-90-201 habitual-criminal enhancement.
- Defense objected at trial; trial court overruled, noting no change in crime elements.
- Glaze admitted to three Arkansas prior convictions and Georgia conviction prior to trial.
- Trial court instructed jury under habitual-criminal range; jury convicted felon-in-possession and imposed 25-year sentence.
- Court holds conviction affirmed but remands for resentencing under the Criminal Code framework.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether amended information adequately alleged priors and notice. | Glaze relied on insufficient specificity of prior convictions. | Glaze argues amendment failed to list number/nature of priors. | Amendment valid; sufficient notice of habitual issue. |
| Whether amendment on the morning of trial was proper without prejudice. | State needed to provide immediate notice of the four priors. | Amendment filed before jury submission; no prejudice. | Amendment timely and non-prejudicial; conviction affirmed. |
| Proper sentencing scheme after amendment and multiple statutes. | Habitual-criminal protection under 16-90-201 governs. | Code-based 5-4-501 governs sentencing; harmonization required. | Sentence illegal under 16-90-201; remand for resentencing under 5-4-501. |
Key Cases Cited
- Finch v. State, 262 Ark. 313 (1977) (essential-element notice for habitual punishment outlined in indictment/info)
- Baumgarner v. State, 316 Ark. 373 (1994) (amendment of information can add habitual-offender evidence without changing crime)
- Wilson v. State, 251 Ark. 900 (1972) (general habitual-allegation suffices; bill of particulars can cure)