Jones v. State, 2017 Ark. 266

Defendant Larry Lavell Jones pleaded guilty to rape and attempted first-degree murder but elected jury sentencing; jury imposed life plus 720 months, to be served consecutively.
Incident: after being fired and drinking, Jones attacked and severely beat and raped a woman (M.M.) outside her workplace, fracturing facial bones and causing extensive surgeries and recuperation.
Jones admitted the rape and stated he intended to kill the victim; he asked the jury for maximum punishment.
On appeal, counsel filed an Anders/Rule 4-3(k) no-merit brief and moved to withdraw; Jones filed no pro se points.
The preserved adverse rulings challenged on appeal: (1) victim-impact testimony from a Dillard’s employee, (2) admission of additional injury photographs, and (3) the court’s imposition of consecutive sentences.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of bystander/victim-impact testimony	State: testimony about how the attack affected the employee’s work and safety awareness was relevant	Jones: testimony exceeded permissible scope of victim-impact evidence and was irrelevant	Court: testimony narrowly limited to work effects; admission within discretion — frivolous to appeal
Admission of additional photographs of victim’s injuries	State: photos showed different injuries or clearer views and aided testimony	Jones: photos were cumulative and unduly prejudicial	Court: photos showed differences; foundational limits imposed; admission within discretion — frivolous to appeal
Consecutive sentencing	Jones: (arguable) sentencing should be concurrent	State/Court: consecutive sentences permitted when jury recommends or court orders	Court: running sentences consecutively was discretionary and not an abuse given plea for maximum — frivolous to appeal
Anders/no-merit counsel withdrawal	Counsel: no nonfrivolous issues warrant appeal under Anders and Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(k)	N/A (defendant did not file pro se points)	Court: brief complied with Anders and Rule 4-3(k); affirmed sentence and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (establishes procedure for counsel withdrawing on appeal when no nonfrivolous issues exist)
Starling v. State, 2016 Ark. 20 (2016) (standard for reviewing evidentiary rulings — abuse of discretion)
Grant v. State, 357 Ark. 91 (2004) (definition of abuse of discretion in evidentiary rulings)
Ramaker v. State, 345 Ark. 225 (2001) (trial court discretion in admitting evidence)
Barnes v. State, 346 Ark. 91 (2001) (photographs admissible when they aid jury understanding)
Jones v. State, 340 Ark. 390 (2000) (purposes for admitting graphic photos of injuries)
Throneberry v. State, 2009 Ark. 507 (2009) (sentencing concurrency vs. consecutiveness is discretionary)