Ark. Code Ann. » Title 27 Chapter 53
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 27-53-208 (2020)

Use of accident and supplemental reports

✓ 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. All required accident reports and supplemental reports shall be without prejudice to the individual so reporting and are for the use of the Division of Arkansas State Police.
      1. The division may disclose the identity of a person involved in an accident when the identity is not otherwise known or when the person denies his or her presence at the accident.
      2. Except as provided under § 27-53-202(b)(2)(B), the division may disclose to any person involved in the accident or to his or her attorney or agent the name and address of any occupants and passengers in any of the vehicles involved in the accident as may be shown by the reports.
    1. No report shall be used as evidence in any civil or criminal trial arising out of an accident.
    2. The division shall furnish the report upon the demand of any person who has made or claims to have made the report or, upon demand of any court, a certificate showing that a specified accident report has or has not been made to the division solely to prove a compliance or a failure to comply with the requirement that the report be made to the division.

History. Acts 1937, No. 300, § 45; Pope's Dig., § 6703; Acts 1949, No. 464, § 3; A.S.A. 1947, § 75-910; Acts 2013, No. 1229, § 3.

Amendments. The 2013 amendment added subdivision designations in (a)(2); in present (a)(2)(B), substituted “They may disclose” for “Except as provided under § 27-53-202(b)(2)(B), the department may disclose,” “their” for “his or her,” and deleted “and all” following “any.”

Effective Dates. Acts 2013, No. 1229, § 7: Jan. 1, 2015.

Case Notes

Scope of Privilege.

The automobile accident report privilege in subdivision (b)(1) of this section is expressly extended only to the report itself, and does not shield testimony of the investigating officer as to that officer's observations made in preparing his report, including statements made to the officer by the motorist. Stephens v. State, 320 Ark. 426, 898 S.W.2d 435 (1995).

Written Report.

Although subdivision (b)(1) of this section does not expressly refer to a written report, the statute plainly contemplates a writing. Stephens v. State, 320 Ark. 426, 898 S.W.2d 435 (1995).

Cited: Shock v. Tester, 405 F.2d 852 (8th Cir. 1969).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1995–2013 · leading case: Stephens v. State, 898 S.W.2d 435 (Ark. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Stephens v. State, 898 S.W.2d 435 (Ark. 1995). · cites it 10× “1994) to report his traffic accident to the Arkansas State Police, and, as such, were precluded from use as evidence against him at trial under Ark.Code Ann. § 27-53-208(b)(1) (Repl.1994).”
Stephen v. State, 898 S.W.2d 435 (Ark. 1995). · cites it 10× “1994) to report his traffic accident to the Arkansas State Police, and, as such, were precluded from use as evidence against him at trial under Ark. Code Ann. § 27-53-208 (b)(l) (Repl. 1994).”
King v. Carter, 2013 Ark. App. 749. · cites it 2× “King contends that the circuit court mistakenly considered the collision report because, under Ark. Code Ann. § 27-53-208 (b)(1) (Repl. 2010), which governs use of accident and supplemental reports, “[n]o report shall be used as evidence in any civil or criminal trial arising…”
Ark. Code Ann. § 27-53-208(b)(1): 1 case
Stephens v. State, 898 S.W.2d 435 (Ark. 1995). “1994) to report his traffic accident to the Arkansas State Police, and, as such, were precluded from use as evidence against him at trial under Ark.Code Ann. § 27-53-208(b)(1) (Repl.1994).”
Ark. Code Ann. § 27-53-208(b)(l): 1 case
Stephen v. State, 898 S.W.2d 435 (Ark. 1995). “1994) to report his traffic accident to the Arkansas State Police, and, as such, were precluded from use as evidence against him at trial under Ark. Code Ann. § 27-53-208 (b)(l) (Repl. 1994).”
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.