Arkansas Code Annotated
Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (2026)
[Repealed.]
✓ current as of May 2026
A.C.R.C. Notes. This section was amended by Acts 2017, No. 913, §§ 13 and 14 to change the name of the Division of Behavioral Health Services to the Division of Aging, Adult, and Behavioral Health Services in subdivisions (a)(3)(B), (b)(1)(C), (b)(2), and (b)(3). However, this section was specifically repealed by Acts 2017, No. 472, § 5.
Publisher's Notes. This section, concerning mental health examination of defendant, was repealed by Acts 2017, No. 472, § 5. The section was derived from Acts 1975, No. 280, § 605; 1977, No. 360, § 2; 1979, No. 886, § 1; 1983, No. 191, § 3; A.S.A. 1947, § 41-605; Acts 1989, No. 645, §§ 5, 6; 1989, No. 898, § 1; 1989, No. 911, §§ 5, 6; 1995, No. 767, § 3; 2001, No. 1554, § 3; 2011, No. 991, §§ 1-3; 2013, No. 506, § 1; 2015, No. 1155, §§ 1, 2. For current law, see §§ 5-2-327 — 5-2-530.
Research References
ALR.
Adequacy, Under Strickland Standard, of Defense Counsel’s Representation of Client in Sentencing Phase of State Court Death Penalty Case — Counsel’s Purported Complete Failure to Investigate Client’s Mental Illness or Dysfunction. 6 A.L.R.7th Art. 3 (2015).
Ark. L. Rev.
Recent Developments: Criminal Law: Placing Burden of Proof on Defendant to Show Issue of Insanity Found Constitutional, 33 Ark. L. Rev. 433.
U. Ark. Little Rock L.J.
Note, Constitutional Law — Indigent Defense — Arkansas Statutory Fee and Expense Limitations Unconstitutional.Arnold v. Kemp, 306 Ark. 294, 813 S.W.2d 770 (1991), 14 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 595.
Survey of Legislation, 2001 Arkansas General Assembly, Criminal Law, 24 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 429.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 89
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1988–2023 · leading case: Smith v. Fox, 193 S.W.3d 238 (Ark. 2004).
Smith v. Fox, 193 S.W.3d 238 (Ark. 2004). “We are asked to decide whether a federal mental evaluation is sufficient to satisfy Arkansas’ statutory scheme governing such evaluations, found in Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Supp. 2003). Procedurally, the State also questions whether the petitioner Tyree Smith has standing to…”
Mauppin v. State, 831 S.W.2d 104 (Ark. 1992). “Pritchard, a staff psychologist, not a psychiatrist as required by Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305, issued the report on behalf of the State Hospital which provided in part: Diagnosis: Axis IDementia secondary to gunshot wound to head, Moderate; Axis IIDeferred; Axis IIIBilateral,…”
Hubbard v. State, 812 S.W.2d 107 (Ark. 1991). “Simon’s testimony did not comply with the requirement of the court’s order and Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (1987) in that neither did he express an opinion as to whether appellant possessed the requisite culpable mental state for first-degree murder nor, in making his evaluation of…”
Turner v. State, 931 S.W.2d 86 (Ark. 1996). “Turner's point on appeal asserts the trial court erred in denying a continuance, but his argument focuses mostly on his construction of Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Supp.1995), and claim that, if an evaluation report was not filed in strict compliance with that statute, he could not…”
Coulter v. State, 804 S.W.2d 348 (Ark. 1991). “Psychiatric examination of a defendant is provided in Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Supp.1989). Subsection (a)(1) makes the psychiatric examination mandatory if the defendant files notice that "there is reason to believe that mental disease or defect of the defendant will or has…”
Addison v. State, 765 S.W.2d 566 (Ark. 1989). “Based upon the report, the trial judge decided that he was fit for trial. We conclude that the judge was in substantial compliance with our code provisions and that there is substantial evidence to support his findings.”
Camargo v. State, 55 S.W.3d 255 (Ark. 2001). “r calculation: (1) the time from January 12, 1995, to June 19, 1995, a total of 158 days, due to Appellant’s request for a mental evaluation; (2) the time from July 12, 1995, to August 22, 1995, a total of forty-one days, due to a second request for a mental evaluation; and (3)…”
Scott v. State, 989 S.W.2d 891 (Ark. 1999). “The record reveals that Appellant requested a mental examination pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Repl.1997). The trial court granted the request in an order filed on January 21, 1997.”
Barnes v. State, 55 S.W.3d 271 (Ark. 2001). “Given the circumstances described above, and also given the fact that any further mental evaluations after the first one required under Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Repl. 1997) are "discretionary with the trial court," see Dyer v.”
Rychtarik v. State, 976 S.W.2d 374 (Ark. 1998). “68 (1985), and Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Repl. 1997). Appellant’s reading of Ake is misplaced.”
Dyer v. State, 36 S.W.3d 724 (Ark. 2001). “When an accused raises the defense of mental disease or defect or places his or her competency in issue, the trial court must follow the procedures for evaluation set out in Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Repl. 1997). An evaluation performed under section 5-2-305 does not ordinarily…”
Clemmerson v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs., 279 S.W.3d 484 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008). “Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Repl.2006). Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-2-305(a)(1) states that the trial court shall immediately suspend proceedings if the defendant files notice that he will put his fitness to proceed in issue or if there is otherwise reason to doubt the…”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(B) — 1 case
Smith v. State, 380 S.W.3d 524 (Ark. Ct. App. 2011).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(D) — 1 case
Steward v. State, 233 S.W.3d 180 (Ark. Ct. App. 2006).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(a) — 5 cases
Scott v. State, 989 S.W.2d 891 (Ark. 1999). “The record reveals that Appellant requested a mental examination pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Repl.1997). The trial court granted the request in an order filed on January 21, 1997.”
Sandoval-Vega v. State, 384 S.W.3d 508 (Ark. 2011).
Simpson v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 103 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015).
Holden v. State, 289 S.W.3d 125 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008).
Smith v. State, 380 S.W.3d 524 (Ark. Ct. App. 2011).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(a)(1) — 5 cases
Clemmerson v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs., 279 S.W.3d 484 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008). “Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Repl.2006). Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-2-305(a)(1) states that the trial court shall immediately suspend proceedings if the defendant files notice that he will put his fitness to proceed in issue or if there is otherwise reason to doubt the…”
Holden v. State, 289 S.W.3d 125 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008).
Bryant v. State, 231 S.W.3d 91 (Ark. Ct. App. 2006).
Steward v. State, 233 S.W.3d 180 (Ark. Ct. App. 2006).
Cleveland v. Frazier, 999 S.W.2d 188 (Ark. 1999).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(a)(1)(B)(ii) — 1 case
Flowers v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 181 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(a)(2) — 3 cases
Addison v. State, 765 S.W.2d 566 (Ark. 1989). “Based upon the report, the trial judge decided that he was fit for trial. We conclude that the judge was in substantial compliance with our code provisions and that there is substantial evidence to support his findings.”
King v. State, 877 S.W.2d 583 (Ark. 1994).
Griffin v. State, 755 S.W.2d 574 (Ark. Ct. App. 1988).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(a)(Z) — 1 case
King v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 81 (Ark. Ct. App. 2014).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(a)(l) — 1 case
Cleveland v. Frazier, 999 S.W.2d 188 (Ark. 1999).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(a)(l)(B) — 1 case
Smith v. State, 380 S.W.3d 524 (Ark. Ct. App. 2011).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(a)(l)(B)(i) — 1 case
Flowers v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 181 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(b) — 1 case
A.M. v. State of Arkansas, 2021 Ark. App. 418 (Ark. Ct. App. 2021).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(b)(1) — 1 case
Smith v. Fox, 193 S.W.3d 238 (Ark. 2004). “We are asked to decide whether a federal mental evaluation is sufficient to satisfy Arkansas’ statutory scheme governing such evaluations, found in Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Supp. 2003). Procedurally, the State also questions whether the petitioner Tyree Smith has standing to…”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(b)(2) — 1 case
Addison v. State, 765 S.W.2d 566 (Ark. 1989). “Based upon the report, the trial judge decided that he was fit for trial. We conclude that the judge was in substantial compliance with our code provisions and that there is substantial evidence to support his findings.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(b)(4) — 1 case
Hubbard v. State, 812 S.W.2d 107 (Ark. 1991). “Simon’s testimony did not comply with the requirement of the court’s order and Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (1987) in that neither did he express an opinion as to whether appellant possessed the requisite culpable mental state for first-degree murder nor, in making his evaluation of…”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(b)(l) — 1 case
Williams v. Norris, 576 F.3d 850 (8th Cir. 2009).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(d) — 5 cases
Turner v. State, 931 S.W.2d 86 (Ark. 1996). “Turner's point on appeal asserts the trial court erred in denying a continuance, but his argument focuses mostly on his construction of Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Supp.1995), and claim that, if an evaluation report was not filed in strict compliance with that statute, he could not…”
Addison v. State, 765 S.W.2d 566 (Ark. 1989). “Based upon the report, the trial judge decided that he was fit for trial. We conclude that the judge was in substantial compliance with our code provisions and that there is substantial evidence to support his findings.”
Creed v. State, 273 S.W.3d 494 (Ark. 2008).
Griffin v. State, 755 S.W.2d 574 (Ark. Ct. App. 1988).
Don William Davis v. Larry Norris (8th Cir. 2005).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(d)(1) — 1 case
Coulter v. State, 804 S.W.2d 348 (Ark. 1991). “Psychiatric examination of a defendant is provided in Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Supp.1989). Subsection (a)(1) makes the psychiatric examination mandatory if the defendant files notice that "there is reason to believe that mental disease or defect of the defendant will or has…”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(d)(3) — 1 case
Mauppin v. State, 831 S.W.2d 104 (Ark. 1992). “Pritchard, a staff psychologist, not a psychiatrist as required by Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305, issued the report on behalf of the State Hospital which provided in part: Diagnosis: Axis IDementia secondary to gunshot wound to head, Moderate; Axis IIDeferred; Axis IIIBilateral,…”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(d)(4) — 2 cases
Mauppin v. State, 831 S.W.2d 104 (Ark. 1992). “Pritchard, a staff psychologist, not a psychiatrist as required by Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305, issued the report on behalf of the State Hospital which provided in part: Diagnosis: Axis IDementia secondary to gunshot wound to head, Moderate; Axis IIDeferred; Axis IIIBilateral,…”
Williams v. State, 894 S.W.2d 923 (Ark. 1995).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(d)(l) — 2 cases
Coulter v. State, 804 S.W.2d 348 (Ark. 1991). “Psychiatric examination of a defendant is provided in Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Supp.1989). Subsection (a)(1) makes the psychiatric examination mandatory if the defendant files notice that "there is reason to believe that mental disease or defect of the defendant will or has…”
Miller v. State, 887 S.W.2d 280 (Ark. 1994).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305(f) — 1 case
Turner v. State, 931 S.W.2d 86 (Ark. 1996). “Turner's point on appeal asserts the trial court erred in denying a continuance, but his argument focuses mostly on his construction of Ark.Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Supp.1995), and claim that, if an evaluation report was not filed in strict compliance with that statute, he could not…”
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.