Page:Jegley v. Picado, 349 Ark. 600 (2002).pdf/12

Rh review focuses not only on the pleadings, but also on the affidavits and other documents filed by the parties. Id. See Ark. R. Civ. P. 56 (2002).

[6] For his first point on appeal, appellant argues that appellees cannot seek a declaratory judgment on the constitutionality of the sodomy statute because they have not shown the existence of a justiciable controversy by way of a credible threat of imminent prosecution. In response, appellees contend they have abundantly demonstrated that they are faced with a credible threat of prosecution under the statute. They further assert that the statute's unequal treatment alone, and the stigma and collateral harms it triggers for lesbians and gay men, inflict ongoing, serious injuries long recognized as judicially cognizable. On appeal, the question as to whether there was a complete absence of a justiciable issue shall be reviewed de novo on the record of the trial court. Stilley v. Hubbs, 344 Ark. 1, 40 S.W.3d 209 (2001).

[7] In Picado I, this court alluded to the justiciable-controversy requirement:"As a general rule, equity jurisdiction exists only when the remedy at law is inadequate. More particularly, 'equity will not entertain a contest over the validity of a statute nor restrain prosecutions pending the determination of the validity thereof where an adequate remedy at law exists.' Here, Appellants argue that Appellees' remedy at law is to challenge the constitutionality of section 5-14-122 in defense of a prosecution under that statute. We disagree with Appellants' assertion that Appellees' constitutional challenge must be postponed until one or more of them is arrested and charged with violating the statute. We agree, however, that the chancery court lacks jurisdiction to hear Appellees' complaint. [Citations and emphasis omitted.]"338 Ark. at 230-31, 996 S.W.2d at 18-19. Based upon the quoted language, the circuit court found on remand that we ruled in Picado I that appellees' constitutional challenge did not have to be postponed until one or more of them was arrested and charged with violating the statute.