Page:Walls v. State (1999).pdf/1

490

Charles A. "Jack" WALLS v. STATE of Arkansas

CR 98-521

Supreme Court of Arkansas Opinion delivered March 4, 1999 [Petition for rehearing denied April 15, 1999. ]


 * 1) C.—Arkansas case law has primarily dealt with the relevancy of victim-impact evidence in the context of murder victims; it has been held that relevant victim-impact evidence is evidence that informs the jury of the toll of the murder on the victim's family; when victim-impact evidence is unduly prejudicial, it may render the trial fundamentally unfair and violate the Due Process Clause.
 * 2) E.—The circuit judge erred when he twice overruled objections by defense counsel and stated that the rules of evidence did not apply to sentencing hearings or to victim-impact evidence in particular; the evidence listed in Ark. Code Ann. § 16-97-103 (Supp. 1997), including victim-impact evidence, must be governed by the rules of admissibility and exclusion for the proceedings to pass constitutional muster.
 * 3) C.—It has been emphasized in both civil and criminal cases that the circumstances of a bench trial are different with respect to relevant evidence because a judge is better equipped to sort out what is pertinent to the issue at hand.
 * 4) C.—Where evidence in a bench trial has been contested by defense counsel by a motion in limine and the motion has been overruled, unlike a jury trial, subsequent objections to the testimony are not necessary; if a contemporaneous objection is not made at the time the evidence is offered during a jury trial, the proverbial bell will have been rung and the jury prejudiced; however, when the contested evidence is mentioned during a bench trial, there is no risk of prejudice because a trial judge is able to consider evidence only for its proper purpose. and would grant.