K.W. v. State

K.W. v. STATE of Arkansas

96-201                                             ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
               Opinion delivered February 10, 1997


1.   Appeal & error -- appeal must be from final order -- when
     order is final. -- The requirement that an order be final to
     be appealable is a jurisdictional requirement; the purpose of
     the finality requirement is to avoid piecemeal litigation; an
     order is final if it dismisses the parties from the court,
     discharges them from the action, or concludes their rights to
     the subject matter in controversy; the order must put the
     judge's directive into execution, ending the litigation, or a
     separable branch of it.

2.   Appeal & error -- order appealed from not final -- merits of
     argument not reached. -- Where the order appealed from was an
     order releasing appellant pending further hearings in the
     case, the hearings yet to be conducted did not involve
     collateral matters but rather the heart of the case, and
     appellant had yet to enter a plea or undergo a disposition
     hearing, the appellate court did not reach the merits of her
     argument because the order appealed from was not final; the
     appeal was dismissed.     


     Appeal from Pulaski Chancery Court, Eighth Division; Wiley A.
Branton, Jr., Chancellor; appeal dismissed.
     Gerard F. Glynn, for appellant.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  Sandy Moll, Asst. Att'y Gen.,
for appellee.

W. H. "Dub" Arnold, Chief Justice.
     K.W., a juvenile, was detained by an intake officer on October
24, 1995.  The basis for the detention was an allegation that K.W.
had committed the offense of Furnishing Prohibited Articles, Ark.
Code Ann.  5-54-119 (Repl. 1993).  Within seventy-two hours of her
detention, K.W. was given a detention hearing before a judge,
pursuant to Ark. Code Ann.  9-27-313(d)(2)(A)(ii) and Ark. Code
Ann.  9-7-326(a) (Supp. 1995).  At the close of the hearing, the
judge released K.W. to her parents, but imposed certain
restrictions and conditions on her release.  K.W. brings her appeal
from the order that memorialized those restrictions and conditions. 
We hold that the order appealed from is not a final order and
dismiss the appeal.  
     The facts are as follows.  On the evening of October 24, 1995,
K.W. was taken into custody by a Pulaski County Sheriff's deputy. 
According to the deputy's arrest report, K.W. delivered a pair of
shoes to an inmate of the Pulaski County Regional Detention
Facility.  The soles of the shoes were found to contain "marijuana,
numerous Schedule IV and Schedule II controlled substances in pill
and tablet form along with tobacco and matches."  K.W. was seen by
an intake officer, and she was detained until her detention hearing
on the morning of October 27, 1995.  At the hearing, the judge
decided to release K.W. to the custody of her parents.  The court's
order set a plea date of January 5, 1996, and imposed the following
conditions on K.W.'s release:  undergo drug and alcohol screening; 
reside with parents and obey reasonable commands;  attend school
and obey school rules;  and abide by a curfew.
     On appeal, K.W. argues that the intake officer's decision to
detain her was improper, thereby tainting the court's decision to
restrict her liberty pending adjudication.  She cites Ark. Code
Ann.  9-27-322 (Repl. 1993), which provides that an intake officer
must consider and weigh certain factors before deciding to detain
a juvenile.  It is K.W.'s contention that the intake officer did
not weigh the statutory factors, thereby rendering her detention
illegal and subjecting her to the imposition of release conditions
at a detention hearing. 
     We do not reach the merits of K.W.'s argument because the
order appealed from is not final.  The requirement that an order be
final to be appealable is a jurisdictional requirement.  Wilburn v.
Keenan Cos., Inc., 297 Ark. 74, 759 S.W.2d 554 (1988).  The purpose
of the finality requirement is to avoid piecemeal litigation.  Lamb
v. JFM, Inc., 311 Ark. 89, 842 S.W.2d 10 (1992).  An order is final
if it dismisses the parties from the court, discharges them from
the action, or concludes their rights to the subject matter in
controversy.  Department of Human Services v. Lopez, 302 Ark. 154,
787 S.W.2d 686 (1990).  The order must put the judge's directive
into execution, ending the litigation, or a separable branch of it. 
Festinger v. Kantor, 264 Ark. 275, 571 S.W.2d 82 (1978).  The order
appealed from in this case is an order releasing K.W. pending
further hearings in the case.  The hearings yet to be conducted did
not involve collateral matters but rather the heart of the case. 
K.W. had yet to enter a plea or undergo a disposition hearing.  
     The order appealed from does not bear any of the indicia of
finality.  We must therefore dismiss the appeal.
     Appeal dismissed.
     Glaze and Imber, JJ., concur, stating that, while they agree
a final order had not yet been filed from which K.W. could file an
appeal, they are of the view that this court could still later
reach the detention issue on the direct appeal of an adjudication
order since the intake officer's authority to detain K.W. in these
circumstances might otherwise evade review.