FROM THE GRANT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 27CR-2014-15-1]
HONORABLE CHRIS E WILLIAMS, JUDGE
Law Firm, by: William O. "Bill" James, Jr., for
Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: Adam Jackson, Ass't
Att'y Gen., for appellee.
WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge.
appeals from his conviction of thirty counts of possession of
child pornography, a Class C felony. On appeal, his sole
argument is that the circuit court committed reversible error
by failing to review the images and video that served as the
basis for the charges prior to ruling to deny appellant's
motion in limine. We affirm.
filed a criminal information on February 7, 2014, charging
appellant with thirty counts of possession of child
pornography. Appellant filed a motion in limine on June 22,
2015, seeking to exclude the combination of thirty images and
videos appellee identified as supporting the thirty counts.
He offered to stipulate that the videos and images were child
pornography, and therefore, argued that with the stipulation,
the videos and images would be "substantially more
prejudicial than probative[, ]" having "no
probative value . . . because the jury [would be] told that
the images/videos contain child pornography." He further
argued that because appellee would likely argue in its case
against him that each time he viewed the video/image, he
revictimized the child, the same revictimization would occur
by showing the videos and images to the jury and such
revictimization could be prevented by describing the videos
and images to the jury. In his prayer for relief, he
specifically asked the court to "conduct a review of
each [video and image] prior to their introduction to rule on
6, 2016, prior to the jury trial, the circuit court held a
hearing on appellant's motion in limine. The circuit
court denied the motion, ruling the following:
Even though the probative value may be something that's
distasteful for the defense it is the ultimate basis for the
cause of action that's brought under the information
filed by the State of Arkansas.
It has to be shown in some limited form so that the jurors
can form their own opinion about the testimony. So the 403
request is denied. The Court does not find that's
prejudicial. It's just a matter of proof that the State
has to show.
I can't let the State have a stipulation on that. They
have an obligation and responsibility to prove.
403 re-victimization violation that is raised by the Defense
is denied. The State has an obligation to show facts to the
jury that would show the jury each count that's been
alleged totaling 30 counts.
The prejudicial effect is completely outweighed by the
necessity of the State to prove each of their counts,
stipulation or no stipulation.
trial proceeded thereafter in which appellant was convicted
of all thirty counts. The jury was unable to reach a
unanimous verdict on the sentence; thus, the trial court
sentenced appellant to thirty years in the Arkansas
Department of Correction. This timely appeal followed.
sole argument on appeal is that the circuit court committed
reversible error by failing to review the videos and images,
which served as the basis for the charges, prior to ruling to
deny appellant's motion in limine. It is clear that
appellant did not make any argument to the circuit court that
it had to review the images before ruling on his motion in
limine. It is well settled that only
the specific objections and requests made at trial will be
considered on appeal. Arguments not
raised at trial will not be addressed for the first time on
appeal, and parties cannot change the grounds for an
objection on appeal but are bound by the scope and nature of
the objections and arguments presented at trial.
to preserve a point for appellate review, a party must obtain
a ruling from the circuit court. The burden of obtaining a ruling on an
objection or motion is upon the movant, and the failure to
secure a ruling constitutes a waiver, precluding its
consideration on appeal. Because appellant failed to obtain a