Jerry Douglas Barnett v. State of Arkansas
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
WENDELL L. GRIFFEN, JUDGE
DIVISION III
CACR07333
November 28, 2007
JERRY DOUGLAS BARNETT
APPELLANT
AN APPEAL FROM UNION
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[CR20054521]
V.
HON. HAMILTON H. SINGLETON,
JUDGE
STATE OF ARKANSAS
APPELLEE
AFFIRMED
On August 15, 2006, a Union County jury found Jerry Douglas Barnett guilty of
various crimes, for which he was sentenced to a total of twenty years imprisonment in the
Arkansas Department of Correction. Appellant does not challenge the convictions. Rather,
he asserts that the trial court erred in allowing the State to present evidence of a 1992 guilty
plea and probation sentence in light of evidence that the court dismissed him from probation
five years later. He acknowledges the decision in McClish v. State, 331 Ark. 295, 962
S.W.2d 332 (1998), which allows the State to present evidence of an expunged conviction,
but he urges us to reconsider that case. We are without the power to overrule supreme court
precedent; therefore, we affirm.
Appellant was convicted of four felonies: residential burglary, Ark. Code Ann. § 539
201(a) (Repl. 2006); theft of property over $500, Ark. Code Ann. § 536103(b)(2) (Repl.
2006); possession of methamphetamine, Ark. Code Ann. § 564401(c)(2)(A) (Repl. 2005);
and possession of drug paraphernalia, Ark. Code Ann. § 564403(c) (Repl. 2005). The State
alleged habitualoffender status under Ark. Code Ann. § 54501(a) (Repl. 2006), which
enhances penalties for persons previously convicted of more than one but fewer than four
felonies.
To prove appellant’s habitualoffender status, the State introduced a certified copy of
a guilty plea to conspiracy to delivery of a controlled substance (LSD), dated March 9, 1992,
1
for which appellant received a fiveyear term of probation. Appellant objected to the entry
of the guilty plea and proffered an April 28, 1997, order, which terminated his probation,
discharged and dismissed the charges against him, and allowed him to seek to have his
criminal record sealed. The court allowed the State to introduce the 1992 guilty plea over
appellant’s objection. The jury later recommended sentences of five years for the residential
burglary and five years for the theft of property. As the jury was unable to affix sentences
on the drug charges, the court sentenced appellant to ten years on the charge of possession
of methamphetamine and five years on the charge of possession of drug paraphernalia. The
court ordered the sentences for residential burglary and theft to be run concurrently;
otherwise, the sentences were consecutive, for a total of twenty years in the Arkansas
Department of Correction.
Appellant’s sole contention on appeal involves the admissibility of the 1992 guilty
plea. Appellant acknowledges that Arkansas law permits expunged convictions to be used
to enhance a defendant’s sentence as a habitual offender. See McClish, supra. He urges this
court to reconsider McClish in light of Ark. Code Ann. § 54311 (Repl. 2006), which orders
a trial court to discharge a defendant and dismiss any charges against him upon his successful
completion of his probationary period. Even if we were to agree with appellant, we are
without power to overturn a decision by the Arkansas Supreme Court. Box v. State, 348 Ark.
1
The State also introduced, without objection, a judgment and commitment order dated
October 26, 2005, reflecting a probation revocation on a separate drug charge.
2
116, 71 S.W.3d 552 (2002); Austin v. State, 98 Ark. App. 380, ___ S.W.3d ____ (2007).
Therefore, we affirm.
Affirmed.
PITTMAN, C.J., and MARSHALL, J., agree.
3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
