arkansasmimi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2014
- Messages
- 10,161
- Reaction score
- 114
Hoping Everyone had a wonderful Thanksgiving
The defendant was called by the defense and was asked only if he had requested an
attorney. On cross, while delving into this issue for the purpose of assessing the defendant’s
credibility, the defendant was asked if he yelled out saying that he wanted to talk to the Federal
agent to which the defendant said “Yeah. I just got beat up.” The defendant went on to say that
a “Reserve Detective” named Gary Siebel beat him up in the bathroom because he wasn’t giving
productive answers and that was why he got in the car with the investigators.
Prior to this testimony by the defendant, which was unresponsive to the question that was
asked, there had been no proof that anyone had threatened or harmed the defendant. And while
the state would like to argue that the defendant’s credibility on this issue versus the other
witnesses that testified is such that the Court could make a decision, the case law says otherwise.
In Smith v. State, 254 Ark. 538, 494 S.W.2d 489 (1973), the court stated, “in determining
the voluntariness of a confession, all material witnesses must be called or their absence
satisfactorily explained in order for the state to meet its burden of proving that a confession was
voluntarily given citing Mercer v. State, 237 Md. 479, 206 A2d. 797 (1965) where the
appellant’s conviction was reversed because his testimony that he was physically mistreated by
two detectives was uncontradicted by either of the persons accused of the mistreatment.
However, in Gill v. State 265 Md. 350, 289 A.2d 575 (1972), that court held that it is not
required that “each person who had casual contact with the accused, once he was in police
custody or being interrogated, must testify to the voluntariness of the confession in order for the
prosecution to satisfy its burden. But when it is contended that someone employed coercive
tactics to obtain inculpatory statements, the charge must be rebutted.” Id.
Because the State was not on notice of these allegations prior to the defendant testifying,
it had no way to anticipate having Siebel testify. Now that the defendant has invoked his name
and made these allegations the State respectfully requests the opportunity to call the necessary
witnesses to rebut these allegations.
Haven't been online or checked Pacer in a while ... I know that AL has a Hearing in Hot Springs, AR on one of the Federal civil suits tomorrow. This was the one he filed against ADOC, the intake~Malvern location. Diff jurisdiction than the ones at Tucker/Varner. Western Division US Fed Court. That judge has ordered copies of AL full medical records to be sent to him and then copies sent to AL. ADOC policies state inmates (or family for that matter) can not have copies of those. Inmates can look at them and make notes once a week but not have copies. Maybe if someone is near there, they will go to the hearing and let give us an update of what happened.
I was going to try to go but life is getting in the way this morning.
That being said, unless it was eaten by cyberspace, I never received an email from VINE saying AL was on "out to court" status. Has the hearing rescheduled or something? Shouldn't VINE still work, even though it's Federal Court?
Guess I was right on this one... and AL has filed Motions on all his Fed Civil Suits to now have Counsel appointed. JMOThis is odd/interesting. This is from the Fed civil suit filed 10/13/2015 from an alleged incident that happened in May when AL went to look at the evidence in his criminal case. Pros John F Johnson is one of the Defendants and listed as main in the case title. Looks like his summons was not executed for some reason. :thinking: Maybe since Pros is not an employee of the PCSO, since the Judge ordered they be served through the PCSO? Seems all things legal go by how it is literally written, JMO.
U.S. District Court
Eastern District of Arkansas (Little Rock)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:15-cv-00630-SWW-BD
Lewis v. Johnson et al
Assigned to: Judge Susan Webber Wright
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Beth Deere
Cause: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Date Filed: 10/13/2015
Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Nature of Suit: 555 Prison Condition: Civil Rights
Jurisdiction: Federal Question
11/16/2015 6 ORDER directing the Clerk of Court to prepare a summons for Defendants Garcia, Stone, Murphy, Austin, and Johnson. The U.S. Marshal service is directed to serve copies of the 2 complaint and the 5 amended complaint, along with any attachments, and a summons for each of these Defendants, without requiring prepayment of fees and costs or security. Service for these Defendants should be through the Pulaski County Sheriff's Office. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 11/16/2015. (ks) (Entered: 11/16/2015)
11/16/2015 7 PARTIAL RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION recommending that the claims against Defendants Bennett, Grayson, Allen, Swaggerty, McDonald, Talley, Deleon, and Freeman be DISMISSED, without prejudice, because Mr. Lewis has not stated claims against these Defendants in his amended complaint. In addition, claims against Defendants Garcia, Stone, Murphy, Austin, and Johnson in their official capacities should be DISMISSED, without prejudice. Objections due within 14 days of this Recommendation. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 11/16/2015. (ks) (Entered: 11/16/2015)
11/17/2015 Summons Issued as to Joseph Austin, Jose Garcia, John F Johnson, Richard Murphy, Cody Stone. Forwarded to the USMS for service. (ks) (Entered: 11/17/2015)
11/25/2015 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed. Jose Garcia served on 11/20/2015. (scw) (Entered: 11/25/2015)
11/25/2015 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed. Cody Stone served on 11/20/2015. (scw) (Entered: 11/25/2015)
11/25/2015 10 SUMMONS Returned Executed. Richard Murphy served on 11/20/2015. (scw) (Entered: 11/25/2015)
11/25/2015 11 SUMMONS Returned Executed. Joseph Austin served on 11/20/2015. (scw) (Entered: 11/25/2015)
11/30/2015 12 Summons Returned Unexecuted as to John F Johnson. (scw) (Entered: 11/30/2015)
ETA: On other cases states US Marshall Service to serve those Defendants that worked at PCSO... But Pros does not work at PCSO.. odd that was worded that way this time. So since Pros doesn't work at PCSO they returned the Pros? looks like it JMHO
example in the case at PCSO :
12/12/2014 4 INITIAL ORDER FOR PRO-SE PRISONER-PLAINTIFFS Granting 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and Directing Monthly Payments be made from Prison Account of Arron Michael Lewis until the $350 filing fee is paid in full. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send a copy of this Order to the Warden of the Tucker Maximum Security Unit, the ADC Trust Fund Centralized Banking Office, and the ADC Compliance Office. The Clerk of the Court shall prepare a summons for Defendants and the United States Marshal is directed to serve a copy of the 3 amended complaint, this order and summons upon them without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor. Signed by Magistrate Judge H. David Young on 12/12/2014. (mcz) (Entered: 12/12/2014)
12/12/2014 Summons Issued as to Allison, Bennett, Hazel, Doc Holladay, Carl Johnson, Lowe, Mitchell, Sarah Speer. Forwarded to USMS for service. (mcz) (Entered: 12/15/2014)