Hurst v. State
2014 Ark. App. 710
Ark. Ct. App.2014Background
- Roy Samuel Hurst pleaded guilty in Arkansas County Circuit Court to one count of theft of property valued at least $25,000 (Class B felony) for taking a Kubota tractor.
- At sentencing the circuit court considered Hurst’s extensive ~40-year criminal history, including a recent Monroe County misdemeanor conviction for stealing a jar of dimes from the county assessor’s office.
- Hurst objected to consideration of the Monroe County misdemeanor because it was on appeal (de novo) from district court to circuit court, arguing it should not “count as a conviction.”
- The circuit court expressly relied on Hurst’s broader criminal history and his lack of rehabilitation; it did not base the sentence solely on the appealed misdemeanor.
- The court sentenced Hurst to 12 years’ imprisonment (within the statutory 5–20 year range for a Class B felony).
- Hurst appealed the sentencing decision, arguing improper sentence enhancement by use of the appealed district-court conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a district-court conviction that is on appeal (de novo to circuit court) may be considered for sentence-enhancement in a separate case | Hurst: an appealed district-court judgment is "as if no judgment had been rendered," so it cannot be used as a conviction for enhancement | State: a conviction is final for enhancement once judgment is pronounced; court may consider it as part of criminal history | Court: Allowed consideration; no abuse of discretion — convictions are final when judgment is pronounced for enhancement purposes (even if on appeal) |
| Whether any error was prejudicial given sentence length | Hurst: inclusion of the appealed misdemeanor prejudiced sentencing | State: sentence falls within statutory range and would not turn on that one conviction given lengthy record | Court: No prejudicial error; sentence within statutory range (12 years) and ample other history supported the sentence |
Key Cases Cited
- Birchett v. State, 291 Ark. 379 (conviction is final for enhancement when judgment is pronounced)
- Crawford v. State, 362 Ark. 301 (broad allowance for sentencing evidence even if inadmissible at guilt phase)
- Whittle v. Washington County Circuit Ct., 325 Ark. 136 (statute permits de novo trial in circuit court for district-court appeals)
- Doles v. State, 385 S.W.3d 315 (conduct may be relevant in sentencing even if never formally charged or convicted)
Outcome: Affirmed (circuit court did not abuse its discretion and any error was not prejudicial).