Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 16-31-101 (2026)

Qualifications

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Every registered voter or, in counties where an enhanced prospective jury list is utilized, every registered voter, licensed driver, or person issued an identification card under § 27-16-805 who is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Arkansas and of the county in which he or she may be summoned for jury service is legally qualified to act as a grand or petit juror if not otherwise disqualified under the express provisions of this act.

History. Acts 1969, No. 568, § 1; A.S.A. 1947, § 39-101; Acts 2003, No. 1404, § 6[5].

A.C.R.C. Notes. Acts 2003, No. 1404, did not contain a Section 4.

Amendments. The 2003 amendment inserted “or, in counties where … under § 27-16-805.”

Meaning of “this act”. Acts 1969, No. 568, codified as §§ 16-30-101, 16-30-103, 16-31-10116-31-104, 16-31-106, 16-31-107, 16-32-10116-32-104, 16-32-106, 16-32-107, 16-32-109.

Research References

ALR.

Prejudical effect of juror's inability to comprehend English. 117 A.L.R.5th 1.

Case Notes

Residency.

Where juror did not meet qualifications because she was not a resident of the county where the case was tried, but she did not knowingly answer falsely any question on voir dire relating to her qualifications, the verdict was not voidable. Bennett v. State, 308 Ark. 393, 825 S.W.2d 560 (1992).

Although defendant's jury included a woman who was a registered voter in the county where the trial was held but was not a resident of that county, defendant was not prejudiced or denied an impartial jury. Bennett v. Lockhart, 39 F.3d 848 (8th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, Bennett v. Arkansas, 514 U.S. 1018, 115 S. Ct. 1363 (1995).

Cited: Jackson v. State, 249 Ark. 653, 460 S.W.2d 319 (1970); Renton v. State, 274 Ark. 87, 622 S.W.2d 171 (1981); Brown v. Lockhart, 781 F.2d 654 (8th Cir. 1986); Farmers Bank v. Perry, 301 Ark. 547, 787 S.W.2d 645 (1990).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1988–2007 · leading case: Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005).
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005). · cites it 2× “§ 21-301 (D) (West 2002) Arkansas 18 Ark. Code Ann. §§ 16-31-101 , 16-32-302 (Lexis Supp.”
Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 (1988). · cites it 2× “Ark. Code Ann. § 16-31-101 (1987) Cal. Cal.”
Farmers Bank of Greenwood v. Perry, 787 S.W.2d 645 (Ark. 1990). · cites it 4× “First, the appellant argues that because the trial court failed to ask preliminary questions of the prospective jurors there was no showing that the veniremen met the requirements of a juror as set out in Ark.Code Ann. § 16-31-101 (1987), such as being a registered voter and a…”
Bennett v. State, 825 S.W.2d 560 (Ark. 1992). · cites it 2× “§ 16-3 l-102(a)(1) (1987), if a juror does not meet the qualifications set out in Ark. Code Ann. § 16-31-101 (1987), he or she is disqualified to act as a juror.”
Thomas v. State, 257 S.W.3d 92 (Ark. 2007). “(b) The qualifications for serving on a jury under § 16-31-101 and the disqualifications under § 16-31-102 shall apply to the enhanced prospective juror pool permitted under subsection (a) of this section.”
Rathbun v. Ward, 866 S.W.2d 403 (Ark. 1993). · cites it 2× “JUROR MISCONDUCT Pursuant to ARCP Rule 59(a) and Ark. Code Ann. §§ 16-31-101 to -107 (1987 & Supp.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.