Tatum v. State
381 S.W.3d 124
Ark. Ct. App.2011Background
- Tatum was charged in Saline County with two counts of first-degree terroristic threatening for threats made at a Bryant gas station on July 24, 2009.
- The information alleged he, while holding a knife, threatened to kill Holly White and her husband Justin White to terrorize them.
- Tatum was tried in a bench trial, found guilty on both counts, and sentenced to concurrent 30 days in jail and six years’ probation.
- Evidence included police officers’ and eyewitness testimony, plus a videotape of the station during the relevant time frame.
- Two independent witnesses testified that Tatum threatened the couple and would kill them, including statements about finding where they lived; Tatum testified in his own defense.
- A dispute arose over a previously undisclosed oral statement by Tatum to a witness alleging he would cut a third witness’s throat; the court denied a motion for mistrial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the evidence sufficient to sustain the terroristic threatening convictions? | State argues substantial evidence showed Tatum’s conscious object to frighten the victims. | Tatum contends the State failed to prove he terrorized or threatened death or serious injury. | Yes; substantial evidence supports the convictions. |
| Was the denial of a mistrial due to discovery violation abuse of discretion? | State maintains no discovery violation occurred; open-file policy disclosed relevant materials. | Tatum argues undisclosed oral statement to a witness harmed his defense and warrants mistrial. | No abuse of discretion; other testimony independently supported the charges; mistrial denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hill v. State, 370 Ark. 102 (2007) (discovery issues and prejudice with undisclosed statements; sufficient other evidence)
- Peters v. State, 357 Ark. 297 (2004) (mistrial is drastic remedy; abuse must be shown)
- Snell v. State, 290 Ark. 503 (1986) (mistrial denial appropriate where lesser remedies exist or no fundamental fairness at stake)
- Rychtarik v. State, 334 Ark. 492 (1998) (defendant not entitled to discovery as substitute for own investigation)
- Turner v. State, 2010 Ark. App. 214 (2010) (sufficiency review for criminal convictions in light of substantial evidence)
- Knight v. State, 25 Ark.App. 353 (1988) (evidence of conscious object to frighten satisfies purpose element)