Small v. City of Little Rock

484 S.W.2d 81, 253 Ark. 7, 1972 Ark. LEXIS 1394
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedSeptember 4, 1972
Docket5743
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 484 S.W.2d 81 (Small v. City of Little Rock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Small v. City of Little Rock, 484 S.W.2d 81, 253 Ark. 7, 1972 Ark. LEXIS 1394 (Ark. 1972).

Opinion

Lyle Brown, Justice.

This is an appeal from a conviction for driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicants. For reversal appellant contends he was denied due process of law and the right to bail.

At the time of his arrest appellant was given a “breatholator test” as authorized by Ark. Stat. Anno. § 75-1045 (Suppl. 1971). As a basis for his challenge of due process, appellant alleges that § 75-1045 (c) (3) was not followed in that he was not advised of his right to have a person of his choice (in addition to the officer giving the test) to administer the test. The sub-section provides:

The person tested may have a physician, or a qualified technician, registered nurse, or other qualified person of his own choice administer a complete [chemical] test or tests in addition to any administered at the direction of a police officer. The law enforcement officer shall advise such person of this right. The refusal or failure of a law enforcement officer to advise such person of this right and to permit the person to obtain such test or tests when such person desires to have such test or tests shall preclude the admission of evidence relating to the test or tests [taken] at the direction of a law enforcement officer.

Had appellant made the appropriate motion and received an adverse ruling, the first point might have been well taken. Instead of asking for exclusion appellant asked that the case be dismissed. The introduction of the evidence furnished no basis for the granting of the motion which was made; there was other evidence of intoxication which made, of itself, a question of fact.

As to the second point — the denial of bail — we find no merit. There is no evidence that appellant either asked for bail or was able to make bail. Furthermore, the denial of bail, standing alone, would not be grounds for dismissal of the criminal charges.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Fletcher v. City of Newport
541 S.W.2d 681 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1976)
Smith v. State
528 S.W.2d 359 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1975)
Strauser v. State
501 S.W.2d 780 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1973)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
484 S.W.2d 81, 253 Ark. 7, 1972 Ark. LEXIS 1394, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/small-v-city-of-little-rock-ark-1972.