Page 220
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 221
APPEAL
FROM THE WASHINGTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 72JV-19-133],
HONORABLE STACEY ZIMMERMAN, JUDGE
Eric
Moore, for appellant.
Leslie
Rutledge, Atty Gen., by: Michael L. Yarbrough, Asst Atty
Gen., for appellee.
OPINION
N. MARK
KLAPPENBACH, Judge
Appellant D.Q. was charged as a juvenile and accused of being
an accomplice to theft of property, accomplice to commercial
burglary, accomplice to first-degree criminal mischief, and a
minor in possession of a handgun. Appellant was fifteen years
old at the time of the alleged crimes. The State filed a
motion to transfer the case from the juvenile division of
circuit court to the criminal division of circuit court,
which was granted. On appeal, appellant argues that the
circuit court committed reversible error because (1) it
conducted the transfer hearing more than thirty days after
appellant was detained in violation of Ark. Code Ann. §
9-27-318(f) (Repl. 2015), and (2) there was insufficient
evidence to support the decision to transfer. We affirm.
The
charges arose from a February 2019 break-in at an Ace
Hardware store located in Prairie Grove. The stores glass
door, alarm system, glass rifle case panel, and glass handgun
case panel were damaged or destroyed. More than seventy
firearms were stolen. Appellant allegedly acted in concert
with three other juveniles. Appellant was detained on
February 21. The State filed a motion to transfer on March
20.[1] On March 21, the circuit court set the
transfer hearing for March 28.
On
March 27, appellant filed a response to the States motion,
alleging that the circuit court was statutorily required to
hold the transfer hearing within thirty days and that
pursuant to the rules of civil procedure, the last day to
conduct the hearing was March 25, so March 28 would be three
days too late.[2] Appellant cited Ark. Code Ann. §
9-27-318(f): "The court shall conduct a transfer hearing
within thirty (30) days if the juvenile is detained and no
longer than ninety (90) days from the date of the motion to
transfer the case." Appellant contended that construing
the time limitations of Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-318(f) would be
a matter of first impression, that the date of detention was
the proper initiating date, and that this necessitated
dismissal of the States motion to transfer.
Page 222
At the
March 28 hearing, the State argued that appellants statutory
interpretation was incorrect, that a plain reading meant that
the thirty days began to run from the date its motion was
filed, and that this transfer hearing was conducted eight
days later, well within statutory time limitations. The
circuit court concluded that a plain reading of the statute,
and common sense, required that the motions filing was the
date that triggered the statutory time limitations.
The
State then put on its evidence in support of the motion to
transfer out of the juvenile division. Prairie Groves police
chief testified that he responded to a burglary at the
hardware store. The glass door and glass gun cases were
broken; fifty-two pistols, fifteen revolvers, three shotguns,
and five rifles or long guns had been stolen. Following an
investigation, four juveniles, including appellant, were
arrested. Twenty-six of the firearms had been recovered, one
from a high school student who had taken a pistol to school,
one from a known felon, and one from a homicide suspect.
Police learned through their investigation that appellant was
actively involved in planning this burglary while he was in
juvenile detention in the month or so leading up to this
break-in. Another juvenile in detention had provided written
statements and Snapchat messages to the police to show that
appellant tried to recruit him as a getaway driver for this
burglary.
A
Fayetteville police detective testified that the police
recovered a large revolver from a shooting in which one
person was killed and another was injured. The revolver
(identified by its serial numbers) had been ...