State of Arkansas v. Eddie Lee
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No. CR 07-639
Opinion Delivered March 13, 2008
STATE OF ARKANSAS,
APPELLANT,
VS.
APPEAL FRO M TH E PH ILLIPS
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
NO. CR2006-40,
HON. L.T. SIMES II, JUDGE,
EDDIE LEE,
APPELLEE,
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
JIM GUNTER, Associate Justice
This case, like the six other companion cases decided today, see State v. Richardson, ___
Ark. ___, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Mar. 13, 2008); State v. Holden, ___ Ark. ___, ___ S.W.3d ___
(Mar. 13, 2008); State v. Ashwood, ___ Ark. ___, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Mar. 13, 2008); State v.
Joshaway, ___ Ark. ___, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Mar. 13, 2008); State v. Weaver, ___ Ark. ___, ___
S.W.3d ___ (Mar. 13, 2008); and State v. Whitfield, ___ Ark. ___, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Mar. 13,
2008), involves the issue of whether the Phillips County Circuit Court erred by dismissing
theft-of-property charges against Appellee Eddie Lee for an allegedly defective arrest warrant.
We reverse the circuit court’s order and remand the case for trial.
On November 7, 2005, the West Helena City Council voted to authorize the
payment of a bonus or incentive pay in the amount of $1,000 for all full-time employees and
elected officials and in the amount of $500 for all part-time city employees. On November
10, 2005, the council members voted to pay all elected city officials, including the council
members, the mayor, and the city clerk a full salary for the year 2006 when they would no
longer be in office. According to the State, these members of the West Helena City
Council, upon learning that they were not going to be elected to positions on the council
of the newly formed City of Helena-West Helena, met and voted to pay themselves and
other elected officials for one full year. Those officials had already been paid up to that point
in November 2005. Checks representing pay for 2006 were issued on November 15, 2006,
and the checks negotiated were those issued to Whitfield, Weaver, Lee, Holden, Richardson,
Joshaway, and Ashwood. Additionally, on December 27, 2005, checks designated as
incentive pay were issued to Lee, Holden, Richardson, Joshaway, and Ashwood, and these
five checks were negotiated. The State contends that the cashing of these checks by these
defendants, as opposed to their fellow council members who either returned or never
negotiated their checks, constituted a “taking” prohibited by statute.
On December 7, 2006, a motion to dismiss for defective warrant of arrest was filed.
In the circuit court’s June 12, 2007, order, it states that Lee’s motion to dismiss was “adopted
by the Defendant,” which indicates that a motion to dismiss was not necessarily filed in each
defendant’s case. It is alleged that the arrest warrant was signed by a deputy clerk of the
court, that “bearing the signature of a Deputy Clerk is impermissible and that the arrest [was]
invalid.” Because Lee’s motion to dismiss was adopted, we do not remand for rebriefing.
The State now brings its appeal from the circuit court’s dismissal order pursuant to Ark. R.
App. P.–Crim. 3 (2007).
For the reasons articulated in State v. Richardson, supra, we accept jurisdiction over the
-2-
instant appeal. See Ark. R. App. P.–Crim. 3. O ur case law is replete with the proposition
that a defendant is not entitled to a dismissal due to an illegal arrest. See Biggers v. State, 317
Ark. 414, 878 S.W.2d 717 (1994). Thus, even if the arrest were illegal, the State’s
prosecution of Lee’s theft-of-property charges should go forward. For these reasons, we hold
that the circuit court erred in granting Lee’s motion to dismiss on the basis of an allegedly
defective arrest warrant. Accordingly, we reverse the dismissal order and remand the case
for trial.
Reversed and remanded.
-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.
