Cases | Hicks v. State, 940 S.W.2d 855 (Ark. 1997) | 2018
The defendant was convicted of first-degree murder. He appealed, arguing that the State should not have been allowed to present a videotape showing photos of the victim, the victim’s family, or the victim’s friends. He argued further that the video’s probative and informative value to the jury was outweighed by it prejudicial effect because the video was narrated by the victim’s brother and because the victim’s brother improperly elaborated and wept while the video was being shown. Finally, the defendant argued that, because the video contained numerous photos of the victim’s children, it was needlessly cumulative and compounded the prejudice. The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed, concluding that introduction of the videotape did not constitute a due process violation. The Court noted that the trial court reviewed the videotape before allowing it to be played and monitored the presentation of the videotape during the sentencing hearing, spelling out its probative value and intended purpose. The Court noted further that the U.S. Supreme Court has approved the use of video statements during the presentation of victim-impact evidence. Because the trial court considered the videotape’s relevancy and purpose and monitored and limited the admissibility of the videotape, the Court upheld the trial court’s decision to admit the tape and its narration.