Stover v. State
2014 Ark. App. 393
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Stover was convicted by a jury of meth possession, felon in possession of a firearm, and simultaneous possession of drugs and firearms, with total sentences of 40 years.
- He appeals on three grounds: motion for mistrial, sufficiency of evidence for drug convictions, and admission of evidence during sentencing.
- Sufficiency challenge focused on meth possession; he had argued lack of intent proof at trial and narrowed on appeal; court noted arguments were not preserved as raised, so addressed the preservation issue.
- During trial, Stover wore a jail ID bracelet; prosecutors sought removal, leading to voir dire and dismissal of some jurors; he moved for mistrial which the court did not grant; issue deemed not preserved for review because a clear ruling was not obtained.
- At sentencing, the State introduced testimony about subsequent arrests and uncharged meth and a pistol; court admitted it as relevant aggravating evidence and not prejudicial enough to overturn the sentence; the forty-year term within statutory range was affirmed.
- Court affirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence supported meth possession conviction | Stover argues insufficient proof of usable meth. | Stover contends lack of intent proof at trial; but he changed argument on appeal. | Appeal not addressed on sufficiency due to waived argument |
| Whether mistrial was appropriate given bracelet incident | Stover asserts prejudice from seeing jail bracelet; requests mistrial or fresh panel. | State argues remedy not preserved; mistrial not required. | Mistrial not required; issue not preserved for review; no abuse shown on the record |
| Whether sentencing testimony about uncharged crimes was admissible | Stover argues testimony was prejudicial and not probative to sentencing. | State contends evidence relevant to aggravation and character; uncharged conduct admissible. | Admission proper; evidence relevant to aggravation and rehabilitation; sentence within range; no reversal |
Key Cases Cited
- Box v. State, 348 Ark. 116 (2002) (pretrial prejudice issue survived via continuance; fresh panel necessary when in prison garb)
- Lynch v. State, 315 Ark. 47 (1993) (distinguishes cases where jurors saw defendant in custody pretrial)
- Tate v. State, 367 Ark. 576 (2006) (mistrial is drastic; abuse of discretion governs denial/grant)
- Gaines v. State, 340 Ark. 99 (2000) (mistrial standard and discretion guidance)
- Abshure v. State, 79 Ark.App. 317 (2002) (preservation of issues on appeal; scope depends on trial court arguments)
- Williams v. State, 371 Ark. 550 (2007) (pretrial prejudice andVoir dire issues; timing of mistrial considerations)
- Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501 (1976) (defendant cannot be forced to wear identifiable prison clothing)