Arms. v. State (Majority, with Concurring)
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of the introduction of a controlled substance into the body of her newborn baby. The court of appeals affirmed. At issue on appeal was whether Defendant could be convicted of Ark. Rev. Stat. 5-13-210 by “otherwise introduc[ing]” methamphetamine into her baby’s system when the child was outside the womb but still attached to the placenta by the umbilical cord. The Supreme Court reversed and dismissed, holding (1) the phrase “otherwise introduced” must be interpreted to refer to an active process and not to passive bodily processes that result in a mother’s use of a drug entering her newborn child’s system; and (2) therefore, Defendant’s conviction cannot stand.
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.