State v. Rainer, 2014 Ark. 306

Background

Shawn Trevell Rainer was convicted by a jury of second-degree murder for the single-stab death of Takina Douglas and sentenced to 80 years; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Rainer filed a Rule 37 postconviction petition alleging (1) trial counsel was ineffective for not appealing or renewing a pretrial ruling (motion in limine) that excluded testimony about the victim’s prior knife-related violent acts, and (2) counsel failed to object when the case was presented as involving a “serious violent offender.”
The pretrial motion-in-limine hearing was not recorded; at the Rule 37 hearing the trial judge reconstructed the hearing with a bystander’s affidavit and testimony from trial counsel and the prosecutor.
Trial counsel had orally opposed the motion in limine but did not preserve a written record or renew the objection at the close of the State’s case; counsel also did not raise the issue on direct appeal, asserting he believed a transcript existed.
The circuit court granted a new trial under Rule 37, finding counsel ineffective for failing to renew the objection and concluding the excluded prior-act evidence likely would have been admitted and was sufficiently probative under Rule 403; the State appealed.

Issues

Issue	Rainer’s Argument	State’s Argument	Held
Admissibility of victim’s prior knife-related acts	The prior incidents were circumstantially relevant to support an accident defense (showed propensity to have/use knives and explain why victim had a knife).	The prior acts were not relevant to an accident defense; their admission would be excluded as prior-bad-acts evidence under the Rules of Evidence.	Evidence of specific instances of the victim’s prior violent acts was inadmissible for an accident defense; exclusion at trial was correct.
Ineffective assistance — failure to renew objection at trial	Counsel’s failure to renew objection (and later to appeal) was ineffective and prejudiced Rainer because the context at trial made the evidence more probative.	Failure to renew was not ineffective because the underlying objection lacked merit; also counsel had challenged the motion pretrial and preserved the issue for appeal without a renewal requirement.	Counsel was not ineffective: the omitted argument was meritless (evidence inadmissible), and there is no rule requiring renewal of a motion in limine to preserve the issue.
Failure to record the pretrial motion-in-limine hearing / due process	Absence of a record deprived Rainer of appellate review and thus violated due process; this procedural failure supports Rule 37 relief.	A missing recording does not render the conviction void where the record can be adequately supplemented and no prejudice is shown.	Failure to record did not amount to a fundamental due-process defect rendering the judgment void; supplemented record was adequate and no prejudice established.
Mootness / preservation of the “serious violent offender” claim	(Raised below) Counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the offender-designation presentation.	The circuit court did not rule on this issue, so it is unpreserved and moot for appeal.	The claim is moot/unpreserved; appellate court will not reach the merits.

Key Cases Cited

State v. Barrett, 371 Ark. 91 (Ark. 2007) (Rule 37 petitions are civil in nature for certain procedural purposes)
Flores v. State, 350 Ark. 198 (Ark. 2002) (standard for when a finding is clearly erroneous)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Solomon v. State, 323 Ark. 178 (Ark. 1996) (methods and limits for proving character by specific instances)
McClellan v. State, 264 Ark. 223 (Ark. 1978) (character trait must be an operative fact to be proved by specific instances)
Thompson v. State, 306 Ark. 193 (Ark. 1991) (victim’s violent character is not an essential element of murder or accident defense)
Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683 (U.S. 1986) (defendant’s right to present a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense)