Court hears case on the road

Appeal of 2012 animal seizure presented in Fort Smith

FORT SMITH - The Arkansas Supreme Court on Thursday left the confines of its Little Rock chambers and held court before hundreds of students and members of the local bar association and public.

In a program dubbed Appeals on Wheels, the seven-member Supreme Court convened in the auditorium at Fort Smith’s Northside High School to hear oral arguments in a Lonoke County Circuit Court appeal involving animal cruelty.

ADVERTISEMENT

More headlines

Before the hour-long public session began, Chief Justice Jim Hannah told the audience that Amendment 80 of the Arkansas Constitution, passed in 2000, allows the state Supreme Court to travel outside of Little Rock.

“It’s important to hold court in all parts of the state because it gives people an opportunity to see how the Supreme Court works,” Hannah said.

He said that after the public session, the justices would meet in conference to discuss the arguments from both sides of the case for about two hours. The court issues decisions within two weeks of hearing arguments in 75 percent of its cases, Hannah said.

After lunch, justices often go to schools in the area where they meet to speak to students. But because of benchmark testing in Fort Smith on Thursday, only Justice Paul Danielson, who lives in Booneville, remained in Fort Smith and spoke before an advanced placement government class, court communications counsel Stephanie Harris said.

Harris told the crowd Thursday that taking to the road to hold court was one of the justices’ favorite things to do.

The justices hold court outside of Little Rock twice a year, in the spring and fall, Harris said. They have met in Jonesboro, Fayetteville, El Dorado, Texarkana, Blytheville, Monticello, Hope, Harrison, Helena, Hot Springs, Bentonville, Conway and Pine Bluff.

Thursday’s visit to Fort Smith was the second for the court. It heard oral arguments in Fort Smith in 2004 in a case involving violation of the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act by Fort Smith officials.

In the case the justices heard Thursday, Sandra Nance of Austin was appealing the denial of a motion she made to suppress the seizure of the 137 dogs she owned and kept on her property, arguing that the warrantless search and seizure were illegal.

Through her attorney Michael Thompson, she also argued Arkansas’ animal cruelty law, Arkansas Code Annotated 5-62-106, was unconstitutional because it did not provide Nance with due process to contest the seizure of her dogs, a violation of her rights under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article II, Section 15, of the Arkansas Constitution.

Arkansas Assistant Attorney General Kathryn Henry, who argued for the state Thursday, said that Arkansas Code Annotated 5-62-106 was not unconstitutional because it included a 15-day period in which the owner of a seized animal could petition for a hearing for return of the animal.

The dogs, which were part of a business Nance operates, were seized after the Humane Society of Pulaski County received complaints that the dogs were being kept without shade and adequate water in the hot summer sun in 2012.

Nance was convicted in circuit court last year of five misdemeanor counts of cruelty to animals. She was fined $500, ordered to perform 100 hours of community service, lost custody of the five dogs that were the subject of the convictions, and ordered to pay the humane society$6,425 for care and treatment of the five dogs, according to the court records.

The remaining dogs that were seized were returned to her, and she did not have to pay for their lodging or care, the records state.

According to court records, Humane Society officials, a veterinarian and a Lonoke County sheriff’s deputy showed up at the property on the afternoon of June 28, 2012, to check out the complaints.

Nance claims the group was on her property and had already toured the kennels when she arrived. One of the Humane Society officers had called her at her business, Smoochie Poochies in Searcy, and asked her to meet them at the kennel location in Austin. It took her about 30 minutes to drive there.

On her arrival, she argued, society officials announced that they were going to seize the animals because of the poor condition in which they were kept.

Thompson argued Nance believed she was coerced into acquiescing to the seizure of the animals because of the size of the group and an armed deputy who had already toured the kennels and made the decision to seize the dogs.

Henry stated the group stayed in their cars in the property driveway until Nance arrived on the scene. She consented to allow them to look around and the Humane Society members didn’t decide to seize the dogs until after touring the kennel, she said.

Arkansas, Pages 15 on 04/11/2014

Upcoming Events