Ark. Code Ann. » Title 5 Chapter 64
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-411 (2026)

Proximity to certain facilities — Enhanced penalties

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. A person is subject to an enhanced sentence of an additional term of imprisonment of ten (10) years if:
    1. The person:
      1. Possesses a controlled substance in violation of § 5-64-419 and the offense is a Class C felony or greater; or
      2. Possesses with the purpose to deliver, delivers, manufactures, or trafficks a controlled substance in violation of §§ 5-64-420 — 5-64-440; and
    2. The offense is committed on or within one thousand feet (1,000') of the real property of:
      1. A city or state park;
      2. A public or private elementary or secondary school, public vocational school, or private or public college or university;
      3. A designated school bus stop as identified on the route list published by a public school district each year;
      4. A skating rink, Boys and Girls Club, YMCA, YWCA, community center, recreation center, or video arcade;
      5. A publicly funded and administered multifamily housing development;
      6. A drug or alcohol treatment facility;
      7. A day care center;
      8. A church; or
      9. A shelter as defined in § 9-4-102.
  2. The enhanced portion of the sentence is consecutive or concurrent to any other sentence imposed at the discretion of the court.
  3. Any person convicted under this section is not eligible for early release on parole or community correction transfer for the enhanced portion of the sentence.
    1. Except for property covered by subdivision (a)(2)(C) of this section, property covered by this section shall have a notice posted at the entrances to the property stating:
    2. However, the posting of the notice is not a necessary element for the enhancement of a sentence under this section.
  5. As used in this section, “recreation center” means a public place of entertainment consisting of various types of entertainment, including without limitation billiards or pool, ping pong or table tennis, bowling, video games, pinball machines, or any other similar type of entertainment.

“THE SALE OF DRUGS UPON OR WITHIN ONE THOUSAND FEET (1000') OF THIS PROPERTY MAY SUBJECT THE SELLER OF THE DRUGS TO AN ADDITIONAL TEN (10) YEARS IMPRISONMENT IN ADDITION TO THE TERM OF IMPRISONMENT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR THE UNLAWFUL SALE OF DRUGS.”

History. Acts 1989 (3rd Ex. Sess.), No. 88, § 1; 1991, No. 864, § 1; 1995, No. 778, § 1; 1995, No. 799, § 1; 1997, No. 1056, § 1; 2001, No. 1553, § 12; 2003, No. 1707, § 1; 2005, No. 195, § 1; 2005, No. 1994, § 305[B]; 2007, No. 345, § 1; 2007, No. 827, § 62; 2007, No. 1047, § 3; 2011, No. 570, § 42.

A.C.R.C. Notes. Acts 2007, No. 827, § 62 provides: “Acts 1995, No. 778, § 1, is repealed due to a conflict between that act and Acts 1995, No. 779, § 1, in amending § 5-64-411, and which conflict under § 1-2-207 is resolved in favor of Acts 1995, No. 779.”

Acts 2011, No. 570, § 1, provided: “The intent of this act is to implement comprehensive measures designed to reduce recidivism, hold offenders accountable, and contain correction costs.”

Publisher's Notes. As enacted, Acts 2005, No. 1994, contained two sections designated as § 305. The two sections were subsequently designated § 305[A] and § 305[B].

Amendments. The 2001 amendment deleted (e) and redesignated the remaining subsection accordingly.

The 2003 amendment inserted “manufacturing” following “dispensing” in (a).

The 2011 amendment rewrote the introductory language in (a); inserted (a)(1) and (2) and redesignated former (a)(1) through (9) as (a)(2)(A) through (I); in (a)(2)(D), substituted “community center” for “or community or” and added “or video arcade”; in (b), inserted “or concurrent” and “at the discretion of the court”; and substituted “(a)(2)(C)” for “(a)(3)” in (d)(1).

Research References

U. Ark. Little Rock L.J.

Survey — Criminal Law, 14 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 753.

Survey of Legislation, 2003 Arkansas General Assembly, Criminal Law, Controlled Substances, 26 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 366.

Case Notes

Culpable Mental State.

Circuit court erred in concluding that this section does not require a culpable mental state. This section adds an enhanced sentence for a person found guilty of certain offenses, including that for which appellant was convicted, only if an additional requirement is met, i.e., the location where the act was committed; thus, this section defines an offense. Small v. State, 2018 Ark. App. 80, 543 S.W.3d 516 (2018).

Because a circuit court erred in ruling that a sentencing-enhancement offense under this section, for delivery of hydrocodone within 1,000 feet of a church, did not require a culpable mental state and improperly instructed the jury, reversal and remand were required; a culpable mental state is imputed under § 5-2-203 when the statute defining an offense does not prescribe a culpable mental state. Silmon v. State, 2018 Ark. App. 388, 557 S.W.3d 266 (2018).

Because a circuit court erred in concluding that an enhancement offense under this section — for possession of methamphetamine with the purpose to deliver within 1,000 feet of a church — did not require a culpable mental state and improperly instructed the jury, reversal and remand for a new trial on the enhancement offense were necessary. French v. State, 2018 Ark. App. 502, 563 S.W.3d 582 (2018).

Evidence Sufficient.

Evidence was sufficient to support a sentence enhancement for delivering a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a school or a church, where defendant failed to challenge on appeal the admissibility of an officer's testimony about the use of a Lidar laser gun to measure the distances, and the officer testified that he measured the distance between the school and the property where appellant sold drugs at 576 feet. Childers v. State, 2016 Ark. App. 371, 498 S.W.3d 742 (2016).

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel.

In an Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1 case in which an inmate had been convicted of one count of delivery of a controlled substance and received an enhanced sentence pursuant to subdivision (a)(7) of this section (now subdivision (a)(2)(H)), he unsuccessfully argued that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move for a continuance following the state's amendment of the charging information. While his timeline regarding the informant's controlled buy from him and the police officer's measurement of the distance between the church and the sale location was correct, he failed to cite any authority for the proposition that trial counsel had a duty to ask for a continuance based thereon, and trial counsel made the tactical decision to proceed with the trial as scheduled. McCraney v. State, 2010 Ark. 96, 360 S.W.3d 144 (2010).

In an Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1 case in which an inmate had been convicted of one count of delivery of a controlled substance and received an enhanced sentence pursuant to subdivision (a)(7) of this section (now subdivision (a)(2)(H)), he unsuccessfully argued that his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to adequately investigate the facts underlying the application of the enhancement prior to trial or to flesh them out appropriately during cross-examination. As to the failure to investigate, the inmate made only a conclusory statement, wholly lacking in allegations of prejudice; as to the cross-examination claim, his argument provided him no relief as he was procedurally barred from raising it on appeal. McCraney v. State, 2010 Ark. 96, 360 S.W.3d 144 (2010).

Preservation for Review.

Defendant failed to preserve for appeal the issue that the state did not put him on notice that it was seeking the sentencing enhancement, because defendant failed to raise the issue of notice at trial, which precluded the appellate court from addressing it on appeal. Bell v. State, 101 Ark. App. 144, 272 S.W.3d 110 (2008).

Cited: McCoy v. State, 326 Ark. 104, 929 S.W.2d 712 (1996).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1996–2026 · leading case: McCraney v. State, 360 S.W.3d 144 (Ark. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
McCraney v. State, 360 S.W.3d 144 (Ark. 2010). · cites it 3× “Thus, the relevant enhancement statute is currently found at § 5-64-411(a)(8). . On appeal, appellant does not assert all five of the aforementioned arguments from his original Rule 37.”
Small v. State, 543 S.W.3d 516 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 18× “We affirm the trial court's decision to deny his motions to suppress and reverse the trial court's conviction for violating Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-64-411 ; the other two points become moot.”
Maxwell v. Hobbs, 2013 Ark. 307 (Ark. 2013). · cites it 7× “He was sentenced to serve a total of 480 months in the Arkansas Department of Correction, including an enhanced sentence of ten years pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-64-411 (Repl. 2005) based on the delivery of methamphetamine occurring in proximity to certain…”
French v. State, 563 S.W.3d 582 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 8× “" 1 Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-64-411 (Repl. 2016) provides that a person is subject to an additional term of ten years' imprisonment if he or she possesses with the purpose to deliver within 1000 feet of, among other facilities, a church.”
Khabir v. State, 2014 Ark. 369 (Ark. 2014). · cites it 2× “Because the offense was committed within 1000 feet of a park, the sentence was enhanced pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-64-411(a) (Supp.1995). We affirmed.”
Silmon v. State, 557 S.W.3d 266 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 16× “§ 5-64-426 (c)(2)(A), and with the sentencing enhancement offense of "Proximity to certain facilities" in violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-411 , alleging that the delivery was committed on or within 1000 feet of the real property of a church.”
Slater v. State, 2017 Ark. App. 499 (Ark. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 6× “, Fourth, Slater contended in his petition that counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the sentence enhancement under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-411 (Supp. 2011), He argued that the enhancement was illegal because it was not charged in the information.”
Bell v. State, 272 S.W.3d 110 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “The court denied appellant’s motion and followed the jury’s recommendation, resulting in a seventy-three-year term of imprisonment.”
Willie Ray Porchia v. State of Arkansas, 2026 Ark. App. 280 (Ark. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 18× “Pursuant to section 5-64-411, each of the four terms was extended by ten years because the offenses were committed within one thousand feet of a church.”
Childers v. State, 2016 Ark. App. 371 (Ark. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “See Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-411 (a)(2) (Repl. 2016) (providing for enhanced penalties for delivery of a controlled substance in proximity to certain facilities).”
Richard Jerome McClure, Jr. v. State of Arknsas, 2024 Ark. App. 487 (Ark. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “The State nolle prossed a misdemeanor charge and a count of committing his offenses within one thousand feet of a drug-free zone under Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-64-411 (Repl. 2016), with a requirement of imprisonment for another ten years without early release or parole.”
Kyndra Lakiesha Ringo v. State of Arkansas, 2020 Ark. App. 81 (Ark. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “Under the overarching complaint that her counsel “was unwilling to engage in any meaningful discussion of the plea offer,” Ringo 1 See Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-411 (a)(1)(B)–(2)(A) (Repl.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-411(a) — 1 case
Khabir v. State, 2014 Ark. 369 (Ark. 2014). “Because the offense was committed within 1000 feet of a park, the sentence was enhanced pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-64-411(a) (Supp.1995). We affirmed.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-411(a)(1)(B) — 1 case
French v. State, 563 S.W.3d 582 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018). “" 1 Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-64-411 (Repl. 2016) provides that a person is subject to an additional term of ten years' imprisonment if he or she possesses with the purpose to deliver within 1000 feet of, among other facilities, a church.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-411(a)(8) — 1 case
McCraney v. State, 360 S.W.3d 144 (Ark. 2010). “Thus, the relevant enhancement statute is currently found at § 5-64-411(a)(8). . On appeal, appellant does not assert all five of the aforementioned arguments from his original Rule 37.”
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.