Mistrial Didn't Constitute Double Jeopardy

FAYETTEVILLE — A Springdale man can be retried without double jeopardy after the jury in his original trial deadlocked and a mistrial was declared, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Circuit Judge William Storey declared a mistrial in the rape and robbery trial of Arjel Gold after a Washington County jury of seven men and five women deadlocked on two felony counts of rape and one count of robbery.

Gold, 32, sought dismissal of the charges against him then appealed, arguing the judge’s decision to stop the trial placed him in double jeopardy in the event of a retrial. Gold maintained there was no need to declare a mistrial and the jury should have been allowed to continue deliberating because their votes had changed.

The court said a deadlocked jury is a circumstance that qualifies as an overruling necessity for mistrial.

“We had assumed there was no double jeopardy because the mistrial was caused by the hung jury,” said John Threet, Washington County prosecutor. “We’re going to try him again.”

Gold is set to be tried June 17.

Gold was charged in an Oct. 19, 2011, incident in which a woman claimed he sexually assaulted her between two duplexes on Adrian Avenue in Springdale. Gold said the sexual contact between the two was consensual.

The woman left a birthday party after an argument at a home on nearby Amhurst Circle. She walked to Butterfield Coach Road and Adrian Avenue, where she said she approached a group of men, including Gold, looking for a ride home to Huntsville.

The jurors were told a sexual incident occurred as the pair walked to a house to retrieve a vehicle. Gold said the house was owned by his sister.

The woman had several injuries on her neck, body and legs, which Gold claimed were “hickies.”

Gold ended up with the woman’s cellphone and identification, which he claimed she gave to him.

Tony Pirani, Gold’s attorney, told jurors much of the woman’s story didn’t add up. He questioned if she had made the rape allegation because she regretted having sex with Gold.

The high court said Gold’s claim on appeal that a bailiff shouldn't have talked to the jurors about evidence without lawyers present was valid, but the remedy is a new trial, not dismissal of the charges.

Upcoming Events