Ark. Code Ann. § 16-85-512 (2026)
Persons permitted to be present
No persons except the prosecuting attorney, the court reporter, and the witnesses under examination are permitted to be present while the grand jury is examining a charge, and no person whatever shall be present while the grand jury is deliberating or voting on a charge.
History. Crim. Code, § 108; C. & M. Dig., § 2996; Pope's Dig., § 3818; A.S.A. 1947, § 43-919; Acts 2005, No. 1994, § 273.
Amendments. The 2005 amendment inserted “court reporter” following “prosecuting attorney.”
Cross References. Right to interpreter, § 16-89-104.
Case Notes
Presence During Deliberation.
A motion to quash an indictment on the grounds that the prosecuting attorney was present and exercised undue influence and forced the jury to return the indictment was properly overruled where the allegation was not sustained by the evidence presented. Haraway v. State, 203 Ark. 912, 159 S.W.2d 733, cert. denied, Haraway v. Arkansas, 317 U.S. 648, 63 S. Ct. 42 (1942).
Presence During Examination.
An indictment will not be quashed on account of a stranger being in the grand jury room during the taking of testimony. Bennett v. State, 62 Ark. 516, 36 S.W. 947 (1896); Richards v. State, 108 Ark. 87, 157 S.W. 141 (1913); Tiner v. State, 109 Ark. 138, 158 S.W. 1087 (1913).
Presence in the grand jury room during accused's testimony of the police officer in charge of the investigation and his participation in the questioning of accused made it necessary to quash the indictment, even though the accused had said that he had no objection to the officer's presence, since there was no proof that accused knew or was informed of his rights. Moseley v. State, 256 Ark. 716, 510 S.W.2d 298 (1974).
Cited: Bennett v. State, 161 Ark. 496, 257 S.W. 372 (1923); Weems v. Anderson, 257 Ark. 376, 516 S.W.2d 895 (1974); Simpson v. Langston, 281 Ark. 458, 664 S.W.2d 872 (1984).