Elizabeth Gammon Brown v. Rita Maxwell, Warden

ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

PER CURIAM

DECEMBER 6, 2001

ELIZABETH GAMMON BROWN

APPELLANT

v.

RITA MAXWELL, WARDEN

APPELLEE

00-753

AN APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY,

NO. CIV-00-45

HONORABLE HAROLD ERWIN,

CIRCUIT JUDGE

DISMISSED

Appellant filed an application for a judgment pursuant to the Arkansas Administrative Procedures Act challenging the Arkansas Department of Correction's method of classifying offenders. Appellee filed a motion to dismiss the application. The trial court granted appellee's motion and dismissed the appellant's application with prejudice. This appeal followed.

The initial question that must be answered before reaching appellant's arguments is whether we have jurisdiction to address this appeal. Appellee asserts that appellant cannot seek judicial review of an administrative adjudication based on Ark. Code Ann. § 25-15-212(a) (Supp. 1999). Appellant, on the other hand, argues that our decision in Clinton v. Bonds, 306 Ark. 554, 816 S.W.2d 169 (1991) allows inmates judicial review of administrative adjudications.

In Clinton v. Bonds, we granted inmates the right to pursue judicial review of constitutional questions after an administrative adjudication. After reviewing the record, it is clear that appellant failed to raise any constitutional issues. Because appellant failed to raise any constitutional issuesin her petition, she is not entitled to judicial review of the agencies determination on her challenge. We have recognized that administrative agencies, due to their specialization, experience, and greater flexibility of procedure, are better equipped than courts to analyze legal issues dealing with their agencies. First Nat'l Bank v. Arkansas State Bank Comm'r, 301 Ark. 1, 781 S.W.2d 744 (1989). This accounts for the limited scope of review of administrative action and the reluctance of a court to substitute its judgment for that of the agency. Id. In particular, the administration of prisons has generally been held to be beyond the province of the courts. Stevens v. State, 262 Ark. 216, 555 S.W.2d 229 (1977); Walker v. Lockhart, 713 F.2d 1378 (8th Cir. 1983).

Dismissed.

Imber, J., not participating.