From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Apr 1, 1985
686 S.W.2d 440 (Ark. 1985)

Summary

upholding the mandatory sentencing provisions under the Omnibus DWI Act

Summary of this case from Opinion No. 2003-288

Opinion

No. CR 84-190.

Opinion delivered April 1, 1985

AUTOMOBILES — DWI ACT — PROVISIONS MANDATORY. — Trial courts have no discretion to use alternatives of probation or suspension pursuant to Chapter 12 of Title 41 of Arkansas Statutes Annotated as they may with respect to many other offenses; the word "shall" as used in Act 549 of 1983 makes its provisions mandatory.

Appeal from Lincoln Circuit Court; H.A. Taylor, Judge; affirmed.

John F. Gibson, Jr., for appellant.

Steve Clark, Atty Gen., by: Sandra Tucker Partridge, Asst. Atty Gen., for appellee.


The appellant was convicted of DWI, first offense. He asked the court to suspend his sentence or put him on probation so he would not have to attend an alcohol treatment or education program required by Ark. Stat. Ann. 75-2509 (Supp. 1983). The court refused his request, finding it was without authority to grant it in view of the mandatory nature of the statute. Our jurisdiction arises from Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Rule 29.1.c.

The appellant recognizes that our decision in Lovell v. State of Arkansas, 283 Ark. 425, 678 S.W.2d 318 (1984), makes it clear that the word "shall" as used in Act 549 of 1983 makes its provisions mandatory and that we held in the Lovell case that trial courts have no discretion to use alternatives of probation or suspension pursuant to Chapter 12 of Title 41 of Arkansas Statutes Annotated as they may with respect to many other offenses. The appellant asks us to reconsider our ruling in the Lovell case, but he gives us no reason to do so other than the tradition in our courts of granting probation and suspension and the fact that Act 549 does not specifically say that the sentencing alternatives of Ark. Stat. Ann. 41-1201 (Repl. 1977) may not be used.

In view of the specificity of the Act, cited in the Lovell case and re-emphasized in the opinion denying rehearing in that case, we decline to overrule our previous decision.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Harris v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Apr 1, 1985
686 S.W.2d 440 (Ark. 1985)

upholding the mandatory sentencing provisions under the Omnibus DWI Act

Summary of this case from Opinion No. 2003-288
Case details for

Harris v. State

Case Details

Full title:James Calvin HARRIS v. STATE of Arkansas

Court:Supreme Court of Arkansas

Date published: Apr 1, 1985

Citations

686 S.W.2d 440 (Ark. 1985)
686 S.W.2d 440

Citing Cases

Opinion No. 1986-17

The Supreme Court of Arkansas has held that sentencing provisions of the Omnibus DWI Act of 1983 (75-2501 —…

Opinion No. 1991-016

In Killman, the trial court refused to allow the defendant to present evidence of mitigation to the jury. The…