Halford v. State, 27 S.W.3d 346 (Ark. 2000)

Cases | Halford v. State, 27 S.W.3d 346 (Ark. 2000) | 2018

The defendant was convicted of aggravated robbery. On appeal, he argued, among other things, that the victim-impact evidence presented during the sentencing phase of his trial was fundamentally unfair. The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed, holding that none of the defendant’s grounds for appeal warranted a reversal of the judgment. With respect to the defendant’s victim-impact evidence argument, the Court noted that the defendant did not object to the victim’s victim-impact statement when it was read, in its entirety, to the jury. Thus, the Court concluded that it could not consider the merits of the defendant’s argument because the limited exceptions to the plain-error rule did not apply in this case.