Bradley v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION I
No. CACR09-119
Opinion Delivered
June 3, 2009
SHARON L. BRADLEY
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE GARLAND
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. CR-08-265-IV]
V.
HONORABLE MARCIA
HEARNSBERGER, JUDGE
STATE OF ARKANSAS
APPELLEE
AFFIRMED
JOHN MAUZY PITTMAN, Judge
This is an appeal from a conviction of violating Garland County ordinance 2005-19,
which, appellant asserts, prohibits loud and unreasonable noise. Appellant argues that the
ordinance is unconstitutionally vague. Because the record is deficient, we cannot reach the
merits of this argument, and we therefore affirm.
Appellant’s argument contains purported portions of the ordinance at issue. However,
the ordinance was not introduced into evidence and appears nowhere in the transcript of the
proceeding, either as text or in testimony. Nor is it clear that the entire ordinance was
handed to the judge to be read without formal introduction, as in Bolstad v. Pergeson, 305 Ark.
163, 806 S.W.2d 377 (1991). Here the trial judge, upon hearing argument regarding the
constitutionality of the ordinance in question, remarked that she had found the ordinance to
be constitutionally valid in a previous case and was not inclined to rule differently. As a result,
there is nothing in the record to show what the Garland County noise ordinance specifically
provides. See id. Because we do not take judicial notice of county or municipal ordinances,
we are unable to determine whether the ordinance questioned herein is, in fact, invalid. See
Blount v. Hughes, 292 Ark. 166, 728 S.W.2d 519 (1987); Smith v. City of Springdale, 291 Ark.
63, 722 S.W.2d 569 (1987).
Affirmed.
M ARSHALL and H ENRY, JJ., agree.
-2-
CACR09-119
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.