Cases | Smith v. State, 118 S.W.3d 542 (Ark. 2003) | 2018
The defendant was convicted of 20 counts of violation of a minor in the first degree. He appealed, arguing, among other things, that the trial court erred in allowing irrelevant and prejudicial testimony during the sentencing phase of his trial. The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed the trial court on all points on direct appeal, noting that the testimony that the defendant had objected to was part of the victim’s mother’s victim-impact statement. In her statement, the victim’s mother testified about the defendant’s violation of a No Contact Order prohibiting him from having contact with the victim. The defendant asserted that the evidence of another crime was not legitimate victim-impact evidence. The Court concluded, however, that the evidence concerning the no contact order was relevant because it related to the offenses for which the defendant had been convicted. Thus, it was not inappropriate for the victim’s mother to offer testimony in that regard.