Sims v. State, 254 Ark. 9, 491 S.W.2d 584 (1973)

March 12, 1973 · Arkansas Supreme Court · 5818
254 Ark. 9, 491 S.W.2d 584

Richard Monroe SIMS v. STATE of Arkansas

5818

491 S.W. 2d 584

Opinion delivered March 12, 1973

James R. Howard of Howard, Howard & Howard, for appellant.

Jim Guy Tucker, by: Frank B. Newell, asst Atty. Gen, for appellee.

Carleton Harris, Chief Justice.

Richard Monroe was convicted of robbery and his punishment fixed at twenty-one years confinement in the Arkansas Department of Correction. From the judgment so entered comes this appeal. For reversal, only one point is relied upon, viz., “The lower court erred in admitting State’s Exhibit No. 1, the so-called ‘Standard Police Rights Form’.”

The alleged error is based on the testimony of Detective Larry Starks who testified that he was present when Detective Bill Johnson advised Sims of his con*9stitutional rights. The "rights from”1 is in accord with the requirements of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 16 L.Ed. 2d 694, and Starks stated that after Johnson read the instrument to Sims, the form was handed to appellant who appeared to be looking over it, then stated that he understood it, and signed. Starks witnessed the signing. According to subsequent evidence, Detective Bobby Thomas was then given a statement by Sims which implicated appellant in the robbery. Detective Johnson was not present at the trial because of a death in the family.

Appellant argues that the testimony of Starks was hearsay evidence and inadmissible; that the case should have been passed until such time as Detective Johnson could be present. We do not agree that this was hearsay evidence. Starks was not testifying to something that somebody told him, nor, for that matter, what Johnson said during the advisory procedure; rather he was testifying to what he observed, i.e., what Johnson and Sims did. Of course, the evidence was not sought to be admitted as proving the truth of the statements, but merely to establish that the statements were in fact made. See Green v. State, 223 Ark. 761, 270 S.W. 2d 895, and cases cited therein. The evidence was admissible.

Affirmed.