Cases | Nooner v. State, 907 S.W.2d 677 (Ark.1995) | 2018
The defendant was convicted of capital murder committed in furtherance of a robbery. He appealed, arguing, among other things, that the victim-impact testimony of the victim’s mother was irrelevant and prejudicial and that the statute providing for victim-impact testimony was vague. The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed, noting first that pursuant to Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 111 S. Ct. 2597 (1991), the states are permitted to authorize victim-impact testimony. The United States Supreme Court referred specifically to who qualifies as being impacted by a victim’s death, from a victim’s family to those close to the victim, and to the states’ legitimate interest in presenting evidence to counter a defendant’s mitigating evidence. In this case, only the victim’s mother gave impact testimony. The Supreme Court of Arkansas concluded that the statute at issue in this case was not impermissibly vague. The Court noted further that the victim’s mother testified during the penalty phase. The Court concluded that even though the General Assembly expanded the scope of permissible evidence during the penalty phase to include victim-impact evidence, the General Assembly did not expand the scope of punishment or add a new aggravating circumstance. Thus, the victim-impact testimony was appropriate.