Tyrell Benson v. State of Arkansas

2020 Ark. 161

• Court: Supreme Court of Arkansas
• Decided: April 23, 2020
• Status: Published

Opinion

Cite as 2020 Ark. 161 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CR-19-613

Opinion Delivered: April 23, 2020 TYRELL BENSON APPELLANT PRO SE APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI V. COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, SECOND DIVISION STATE OF ARKANSAS [NOS. 60CR-02-1695, 60CR-02-1978] APPELLEE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER CHARLES PIAZZA, JUDGE

REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

SHAWN A. WOMACK, Associate Justice

Tyrell Benson appeals the denial of his motion to apply the parole provision of the

Fair Sentencing of Minors Act to his sentence. The absence of a final order in this case

precludes our review. We remand with instructions for the circuit court to enter a final

written order addressing Benson’s motion.

According to the record, the circuit court orally denied Benson’s motion from the

bench. The court concluded that the motion exceeded the scope of our mandate issued in

Benson v. Kelley, 2018 Ark. 333, 561 S.W.3d 327. It instructed the prosecutor to prepare a

precedent order. Yet, no order was entered. The only other record evidence of a ruling on

the motion is a docket notation stating, “Judge Note Motion Denied.”

Benson subsequently requested entry of a final written order. In response, the

circuit court provided a letter stating that “because the court ruled from the bench dismissing [the motion], there will be no written order.” Benson was provided a copy of

the docket sheet, “where Judge Piazza indicated his oral ruling.” Though Benson’s request

is in the record, the circuit court’s response is found only in Benson’s addendum.

Whether an order is final and subject to appeal is a jurisdictional issue that we will

raise sua sponte. See McHughes v. Wayland, 2019 Ark. 143, at 3, 572 S.W.3d 861, 862. We

have long held that a docket notation is not the entry of a final judgment. See Reeves v.

State, 263 Ark. 227, 231, 564 S.W.2d 503, 505 (1978); Middleton v. Lockhart, 364 Ark. 32,

37, 216 S.W.3d 98, 101 (2005). Under our rules, every judgment or decree shall be set

forth on a separate document. See Ark. R. Civ. P. 58 (2018). A judgment or decree is

effective only when so set forth and entered as provided in Administrative Order No. 2.

Id.

There is simply no record evidence of a final, appealable order in this case. The

docket notation merely states “motion denied.” This vague note does not constitute a final

order. We are consequently unable to reach the argument on appeal. We remand this

case to the circuit court for entry of a final order addressing Benson’s motion.

Tyrell Benson, pro se appellant.

Leslie Rutledge, Att’y Gen., by: Christian Harris, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.