Ruiz v. State

carefully restricting its at a tax on attempts imposing transactions, interstate could avoid afoul running Arkansas Thus, of the clause. commerce we believe the compensating tax act was not intended reach as as would appellee far us go, apply to the first use of simply new railroad designed boxcars an usage throughout system. interstate Granted, all of that was changed Complete Auto Transit v. but Brady, our statute not self- supra, is effectuating simply because What we have said Brady. here is not to be as construed that holding Arkansas could impose fairly use lawfully apportioned tax on newly railroad to be acquired equipment used over its regularly Arkansas, lifetime which include systems provided the criteria Brady are met.

The decree is reversed. & Earl Paul RUIZ Van DENTON v. STATE of Arkansas CR 80-147

Supreme Court Arkansas delivered Opinion July Heller, P.A., Brewer, by: Ron & Hollingsworth Kaplan, for appellants. Gen., Clark, Michael Wheeler and Victra Atty. by:

Steve Gen., Fewell, for appellee. Attys. Asst. L. Ruiz and Earl Van Petitioners Paul

Per Curiam. Court of Logan first the Circuit were convicted Denton 29, 1977, in the robbery, murder County capital June of Marvin Ritchie deaths shooting kidnapping sentences. On appeal, The returned death jury Opal James. new trial another part remanded for a we reversed and Ruiz &Denton the district. again men were tried again The two

915 (1979). & affirmed on Ruiz appeal. We imposed. sentences were Petitioners 617 S.W.2d 6 (1981). Denton v. to Criminal relief pursuant then sought postconviction was denied on its merits. Rule The petition Procedure 37. Denton v. Ruiz & a second have now filed (1982). They 103 S.Ct. under Rule

petition 37. petition will not entertain a subsequent This Court was specifically Rule unless the original petition under a second Wil- petition. without prejudice filing denied Since liams denied with prejudice, was petition petitioners’ original theirs though even are not entitled to a second is case. a capital an by file this petition

Petitioners were prompted them to instructing Court Order of the United States District review of peti the issue of whether a raise cases had been death tioners’ case with other “comparative this the words Although conducted Court. review has in our such a opinion, may appear review” since the practice case every capital been afforded in Collins v. review of our part appellate process made denied, 434 See Hill v. U.S. in cases the death sentence have modified (1983). We Henry

where it was not See appropriate. Neal v. Sumlin v. Giles v. sentences were carefully In case the death petitioners’ sentences in other cases and capital to deliberately compared the fully justified by that the death was penalty it was found seen, and of the two victims. We have not heinous murders see, murder than those are not a more callous likely we and another the Marvin Ritchie petitioners. perpetrated Small, man, into handcuffed and forced together David were took watch from the trunk of a vehicle. Petitioners Small’s shot both men at point-blank range. his wrist and then a critical wound and crucial despite provided Small survived who was ap testimony against petitioners. Opal James, Logan out of rural guide petitioners alive to parently kept of bullet single was found dead two later days County, guilt the head. The evidence through petitioners’ At trial the found circum jury aggravating overwhelming. to warrant the death stances which were sufficient clearly re but no circumstances. This Court mitigating penalty of the death viewed the facts of the case and the imposition and in a for postconviction on two penalty appeals sentences to have been relief. We did not find the death examinations, or those arbitrarily capriciously imposed another petitioners yet opportunity and we will not grant review. dismissed. Petition

Hickman, concurs. J., Hickman, I concur out only point Darrell Justice. some of the of the history death Arkansas. In penalty I was a member of the court that reviewed for the second time the murder capital conviction of Carl Albert Collins. Collins U.S. I dissented in that decision for three legal reasons. When the United States denied Supreme Court certiorari, I concluded that the that I had questions regard the Arkansas death ing statute were penalty answered. Since case, it, the Collins this court has including not approved death in a penalty single case where the or appellant did appellants not deserve the ultimate legal for the penalty conduct for which were found guilty. haveWe not mentioned every opinion that we compared the death with panelty cases with similar facts to meet the review, requirement we perhaps should But, have. quite it has frankly, never occured to us when we have approved that the did appellant deserve the sentence that the of us jury imposed. Some had other questions, but not that one. When the sentence obviously deserved we have comparison, done so and usually have reduced the sentence. cases, review,

In three on first we reserved and remanded trial, for a new and on a second review the re- approved imposition the death One of cases penalty. those was Earl Denton State, Van and Paul Ruiz’s. Van Denton v. Ark. 273 94, 6 State, The others (1981). were: Swindler v. 418, Ark. 267 592 S.W.2d 91 449 U.S. 1057 272 340, State, 1 (1981); 617 v. Hayes S.W.2d 278 645 (1983). S.W.2d 662

In two cases we reversed involving the death penalty, the appellants received lesser sentences on retrial. We State, affirmed both lesser sentences. Westbrook v. State, 433 (1981); S.W.2d Hobbs v. (1981).

S.W.2d haveWe reversed three cases that have not come back to State, us appeal. Harmon v. ; State, Penelton v. (1982);

(1982) v. Rhodes the death penalty have reduced

In six cases we v. reasons. Henry various 278 217, 419 (1983); v. Neal Sumlin 686 (1981); Williams Giles Graham I supra, In (1972). Henry first case where that that was the out pointed That question consideration. had been a serious review Clines v. again up came in that that if the four appellants concluded We together be sentenced be tried could jointly,

case could because simply disclaim his complicity none could since Two justices victim. murdered the actually one only disagreed. spans penalty

Arkansas’s reviewing history Collins, according my seven Since years. more than least 61 information, in at sought has been the death penalty us, has been obtained that have been appealed cases in Arkansas indication that the juries cases. That is an the death duties with and reserve sobriety treat their And we extreme cases. the most serious and only matter, serious a most the review of death cases as taken consideration, being these cases extra attention giving In one only a fair trial. a defendant has received certain that Ford v. be the case. have I felt that not to instance 103 S. Ct. 389 approved had their sentences men who have Of those 20 black, white, court, and one is Hispanic. six are this 13are cases we have approved In those age. over years All are relief, for Rule and on direct appeal on crimes, most severe the law’s without deserved question, death. by if crimes deserve any punishment punishment, that suggested can it be we have approved case single Not is what —which freakish or capricious the sentence supposed prevent. is comparison the three times and the case before us We have reviewed re has denied review. We Court Supreme United States direct appeal; Albert case twice on viewed Carl Collins’ twice, we it Court has examined Supreme United States for postconvic reviewed it once to a pursuant petition (1975), relief. Collins v. tion rem’d, (1976), U.S. 808 Collins v. Arkansas vacated remand, cert. (1977), on aff’d denied, denied, (1977), post-conviction 434 U.S. 878 relief asked also being We are one more time. to review Collins’ case Paul Ruiz A of the record of the second trial of review that room for argument Earl Van Denton leaves little did not receive a fair reasonable standard by any trial to law should and that the punishment imposed according their arguments not be executed. We have examined detail their petition post- on and when we considered appeal relief, we then that the demands conviction were satisfied be only had been met. The can present petition the law or to seek some delay as one for purposes characterized reason, what this court and however to avoid insignificant, effect, Court, in have ordered. the United Sates Supreme ADDENDUM the appellant’s In the cases we have affirmed following death sentence: (1975),

Collins Arkansas, rem’d, U.S. 808 vacated and Collins v. , remand, (1976) aff’d denied, (1977), U.S. 878 he had elderly couple and robbed an (1981). (Shot for, been working killing man.) Hulsey post-convic U.S.

tion order, Hulsey sentence was vacated oral (His 1981.]) No. July Sargeant, PB-C-81-2. [E.D. 196 a during times seven station attendant a service

(Shot robbery.) 756, (1977),

Pickens 261 denied, people shot (1978). (Pickens U.S. 909 7 cert. 435 a female and raped of a store robbery grocery during clerk; died.) several 895, (1977), 553

Woodard denied, post- (1979), petition cert. 439 U.S. 1122 for denied, S.W.2d conviction relief him.) robbing while and killed a man (1981). (Shot State, rev’d, Swindler cert. (1979), (1978), aff'd, 592 S.W.2d denied, post-convic (1980), petition 449 U.S. 1057 denied, 1 (1981). tion relief his car checking who was and killed a (Shot policeman registration.)

Clark v. where robbery in a store grocery (Clark participated killed; to Michi- were he was extradited people several there.) and is a life sentence gan serving Denton and Ruiz v. Van cert. (1981), (1979), aff'd, 915 denied, post-convic (1982), petition U.S. 1093 denied, 44 (1982). tion shot, an Arkansas marshal and robbed (Kidnapped, the marshal and two corps engineers’ employees; shot, died.) one of the other two (1980), Miller v. post-convic 450 U.S. 1035 tion and killed a (Robbed storekeeper.) Singleton 1996 (1982).(Robbedandstabbed Ct. 102 S. storekeeper, killing her.) State, rev’d,

Hayes aff’d, his (Murdered driver.) and a cab girlfriend State, Hill v. Ark. (1982), 628 S.W.2d 284 S. Ct. 180 (1982), petition post-convic tion relief station, the (Robbed gas and shot kidnapped repeatedly officer; owner and and fish the game died.) officer State, Ford v. (1982), 633 S.W.2d denied, 103 S. Ct. killed Arkansas (1982). (Shot and State Policeman who was him for a traffic pursuing violation.) State, v.

Perry (1982), 642 S.W.2d post-conviction shot and killed theownerof (1983). (He 650 S.W.2d 241 a store and his with a silenced jewelry daughter pistol while robbing store.) State, v.

Simmons and killed four (Shot one of them a persons, police officer, in the course of kid- robbery, a rape, napping.) State, Holmes, Clines, v. Richley, Orndorff 77, 656 four appellants 684 (1983). (The husband, wife and of a in the robbery

participated shooting in the in home which resulted their daughter of the man. death v.

Henderson 652 S.W.2d 26 robbery.) during killed a storekeeper (Shot the case and we have reversed In the cases following Swindler again: death sentence received the appellants and Hayes supra; Van Denton supra; of the the re-imposition time we affirmed Each supra. sentence. life without reduced the sentence from death to

We 27, 531 these cases: Neal v. parole remand, rem’d, (1976), U.S. 808 (1975), aff’d 135 (1980), granted part, reduced, (1981), sentence made death an excessive (diminished pun mental capacity Giles v. ishment); an mental made death excessive

(diminished capacity Graham v. punishment); Arkansas reduced because

(1972), (sentence existing light statute was found to be unconstitutional Sumlin v. Georgia, Furman 408 U.S. [1972]); (reduced pursuant review with cases with similar facts where life without sentences were Williams v. parole imposed); allowed (1981), (jury improperly aggravating circumstance); consider Henry 478, Ark. 419 (1983), (pursuant 647 S.W.2d review).

In following cases where the received a appellant remanded, and, retrial, death sentence we reversed and received a life without appellant sentence: West parole State, 736, rev’d, brook v. Ark. 580 265 S.W.2d 702 309, State, Ark. aff’d, (1981); 433 Hobbs v. 274 624 S.W.2d 125, 617 271, rev’d, Ark. Ark. (1981), aff’d, 273 347 277 S.W.2d 641 9 S.W.2d

We have reversed the cases but following penalty State, yet reached us on Rhodes v. appeal: 276 203, State, Ark. 643 Penelton v. Ark. (1982); S.W.2d 107 277 225, State, 265, (1982); 640 Harmon v. Ark. S.W.2d 795 277 641 S.W.2d 21 cases,

In the murder following was capital charged found, State, but no death Bush v. imposed: rev’d, 577, 550 S.W.2d State, Ark. (1977); Baysinger v. 261 175 rev’d, 605, State, Ark. 550 445 Butler v. (1977); 261 S.W.2d 369, 549 remanded, Ark. Ark. (1977), aff’d, 65 261 S.W.2d 264 243, State, 506, Harris v. Ark. (1978); 558 570 S.W.2d 272 262 State, 535, v. (1977); 143 Hutcherson Ark. 558 S.W.2d 262 State, rev’d, 669, 156 Scott v. Ark. 566 (1977); S.W.2d 263 900, State, v. (1978); Hallman Ark. S.W.2d 737 264 575

199 900, State, Ark. 688 Martin v. 575 S.W.2d (1979); 264 S.W.2d granted 688 State, 175, v. Ark. McGuire (1982); 639 part, 277 S.W.2d 738 State, 621, Andrews v. Ark. 580 198 (1979); S.W.2d 265 265 State, 390, v. Ark. Ark. 585 McCree (1979); 266 578 S.W.2d State, 709, 587 Ark. (1979); 938 Sumlin v. 266 S.W.2d State, rev’d, 380, v. Ark. 591 (1979); Gruzen 267 S.W.2d 571 149, Ark. 634 (1982); (1979), aff’d, 342 276 S.W.2d 514, State, v. Ark. (1980); Van Cleave 598 65 268 S.W.2d 90, State, rev’d, Ark. 598 Robinson 269 State, 312, (1981); Ark. Wallace v. aff’d, 624 S.W.2d 312 274 17, State, Divanovich v. (1980); Ark. 603 399 S.W.2d 270 rev’d, 104, State, Ark. 383 Wilson v. (1980); 271 607 S.W.2d 682, State, Ark. (1981); Curry 611 S.W.2d 739 271 271 913, State, 926, (1981); Shaw v. 611 S.W.2d 745 State, rev’d, Earl v. (1981); S.W.2d 59, (1981); (1981); Cassell v. (1981); Derring Pitts v. Linder v. (1981); Couch v. (1981); Renton v. (1981); 621 S.W.2d Coble v. State, rev’d, Simpson (1981), aff’d, (1983); Lasley Hall v. 115 (1982), petition post- 81-130, conviction No. CR unpublished per curiam Walker v. (June 1983); (1982); Williams v. (1982); Abernathy (1983); Heffernan State, rev’d, (1983); Smith State, rev’d, Henderson v. State, rev’d, McDaniel and Gookin v. Moss

Case Details

Case Name: Ruiz v. State

Court Name: Supreme Court of Arkansas

Date Published: Jul 18, 1983

Citation: 655 S.W.2d 441

Docket Number: CR 80-147

Court Abbreviation: Ark.