Ark. Code Ann. » Title 16 Chapter 32
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106 (2020)

Summons of petit jurors

✓ Arkansas Code release r76: Acts through about 2020 (2021-2025 sessions missing)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. The persons whose names have been selected under § 16-32-105 shall be summoned to appear on a date set by the court to answer questions concerning their qualifications and unless excused or disqualified, to serve the required number of days or for the maximum period during the calendar year for which selected unless sooner discharged.
  2. Jurors shall be summoned by the court or by the sheriff, as the court directs, by:
    1. A notice dispatched by first-class mail;
    2. Notice given personally on the telephone; or
    3. Service of summons personally or by such other method as is permitted or prescribed by law.
      1. If a notice is dispatched by first-class mail, the prospective jurors shall be given a date certain to contact the sheriff or the court to confirm receipt of the notice.
      2. Not later than five (5) days before the prospective juror is to appear, the sheriff or the court shall contact the prospective juror if the prospective juror has failed to acknowledge receipt of the notice.
      3. The court shall have discretion to determine whether the sheriff or the court will be the prospective juror's primary contact.
    2. A notice dispatched by first-class mail shall be sent on a form approved by the Administrative Office of the Courts or it shall include the following language:
  4. Unless excused by the circuit judge, a juror who has been legally summoned and who shall fail to attend on any date when directed to do so may be fined in any sum not less than five dollars ($5.00) nor more than five hundred dollars ($500). However, nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit the inherent power of the court to punish for contempt. All excuses granted by the circuit judge shall be noted in the jury book or the computer program described in § 16-32-103.

“You are hereby notified that you have been chosen as a prospective juror. You must notify the sheriff [or the court] on or before (date) to confirm that you have received this notice. If you do not notify the sheriff [or the court] to confirm this notice, the sheriff [or the court] will contact you and there will be added cost. Please call the sheriff [or the court] at (phone number)

History. Acts 1969, No. 568, §§ 18, 19; A.S.A. 1947, §§ 39-210, 39-211; Acts 1989, No. 892, § 1; 2005, No. 87, § 5.

Cross References. Alternate jurors authorized, § 16-30-102.

Case Notes

Construction.

Subdivision (c)(1) did not require five days' notice to jurors; rather, it provides that when jurors were mailed a notice to serve, they were to confirm with the sheriff that it was received and if no confirmation was given, the sheriff was to follow up with a telephone call to the non-responsive panel member not later than five days before trial. Taylor v. State, 76 Ark. App. 279, 64 S.W.3d 278 (2001).

Borrowing Jurors.

It was proper for the chancery court to borrow jurors for trial of issues in equity as long as the jurors were taken from the jury book and returned to it for use in future trials. Shelton v. State, 254 Ark. 815, 496 S.W.2d 419 (1973) (decision under prior law).

Method of Summons.

Once trial was in progress, the trial judge was within his discretion in approving the most expeditious method of summoning additional prospective jurors, regardless of defendant's claim that the sheriff's use of the telephone to summon more jurors systematically excluded a large class of jurors. Huckaby v. State, 262 Ark. 413, 557 S.W.2d 875 (1977).

Although this section authorizes summoning of prospective jurors by telephone, it was reversible error for the trial court to permit telephone summoning of jurors only four hours prior to trial, especially where only about one-third of the prospective jurors could be so reached in time. Kitchen v. State, 264 Ark. 579, 572 S.W.2d 839 (1978).

Where, inter alia, the defendant failed to show that he was prejudiced by the fact that the jurors were summoned by ordinary mail and not by certified mail as required by this section, any error in the jury selection process was properly considered harmless. Berna v. State, 282 Ark. 563, 670 S.W.2d 434 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1085, 105 S. Ct. 1847, 85 L. Ed. 2d 145 (1985).

Subdivision (c)(1) does not require five-days' notice to jurors, but only requires that if no confirmation is given, the sheriff must follow up with a telephone call to the nonresponsive panel member not later than five days before trial. King v. State, 312 Ark. 89, 847 S.W.2d 37 (1993).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1993–2020 · leading case: Cleveland v. State, 865 S.W.2d 285 (Ark. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cleveland v. State, 865 S.W.2d 285 (Ark. 1993). · cites it 4× “Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106 (b)(2) (Supp. 1993).”
King v. State, 847 S.W.2d 37 (Ark. 1993). · cites it 3× “For his second issue, King maintains that the jury panel was expanded from some fifty-five members to almost double that size, and that this was not accomplished by giving five-days’ notice as contemplated under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106 (c)(l) (Supp. 1991).”
Gwathney v. State, 2009 Ark. 544, 381 S.W.3d 744. · cites it 2× “Under Ark.Code Ann. § 16-32-106(d) (Supp.2007), only a circuit judge may excuse a potential juror from jury service.”
Marvin Arrell Stanton v. State of Arkansas, 2020 Ark. 418, 613 S.W.3d 368. · cites it 2× “See Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106 (d) (Supp. 2007).”
Taylor v. State, 64 S.W.3d 278 (Ark. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 10× “Specifically, Taylor contends that she was not lawfully summoned pursuant to the procedure set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106 (Repl. 1999) and that, due to lack of service of the summons, she was deprived of her due process rights because she was not given adequate notice…”
Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106(b): 1 case
Taylor v. State, 64 S.W.3d 278 (Ark. Ct. App. 2001). “Specifically, Taylor contends that she was not lawfully summoned pursuant to the procedure set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106 (Repl. 1999) and that, due to lack of service of the summons, she was deprived of her due process rights because she was not given adequate notice…”
Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106(b)(2): 1 case
Cleveland v. State, 865 S.W.2d 285 (Ark. 1993). “Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106 (b)(2) (Supp. 1993).”
Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106(c)(1): 1 case
King v. State, 847 S.W.2d 37 (Ark. 1993). “For his second issue, King maintains that the jury panel was expanded from some fifty-five members to almost double that size, and that this was not accomplished by giving five-days’ notice as contemplated under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106 (c)(l) (Supp. 1991).”
Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106(d): 2 cases
Gwathney v. State, 2009 Ark. 544, 381 S.W.3d 744. “Under Ark.Code Ann. § 16-32-106(d) (Supp.2007), only a circuit judge may excuse a potential juror from jury service.”
Taylor v. State, 64 S.W.3d 278 (Ark. Ct. App. 2001). “Specifically, Taylor contends that she was not lawfully summoned pursuant to the procedure set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 16-32-106 (Repl. 1999) and that, due to lack of service of the summons, she was deprived of her due process rights because she was not given adequate notice…”
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.