31 minute read
Election Key Dates
Election Dates and Deadlines:
2010 Preferential Primary & Nonpartisan General Election
March 1-8, 2010 - Candidate Filing Period April 18, 2010 - Voter Registration Deadline May 3-May 17, 2010 - Early Voting May 18, 2010 - Election Day
2010 General Primary Election (Runoff)
May 9, 2010 - Voter Registration Deadline June 1 -June 7, 2010 - Early Voting June 8, 2010 - Election Day
2010 Annual School Election
August 22, 2010 - Voter Registration Deadline September 14-September 20, 2010 - Early Voting September 21, 2010 - Election Day
2010 Annual School Election Runoff
September 12, 2010 - Voter Registration Deadline October 5, 2010-October 11, 2010 - Early Voting October 12, 2010 - Election Day
2010 General Election and Nonpartisan Runoff
October 3, 2010 - Voter Registration Deadline October 18 – November 1, 2010 - Early Voting November 2, 2010 - Election Day
2010 General Election Runoff
(County & Municipal Races) October 24, 2010 - Voter Registration Deadline November 16 – November 22, 2010 - Early Voting November 23, 2010 - Election Day
Contact Information Office of the Secretary of State www.sos.ar.gov Phone: (501) 682-1010 or (800) 482-1127
Arkansas Ethics Commission www.arkansasethics.com Phone: (501) 324-9600 or (800) 422-7773
Arkansas State Board of Election Commissioners www.state.ar.us/sbec/ Phone: (501) 682-1834 or (800) 411-6996
The Pew Research Center (www. pewtrusts.org and www.pewcenteronthestates.org) provide a wealth of information pertinent to county, state and national government; their scientific research and trend-tracking not only can help guide policy decisions, they shed light on the very questions you might be wondering about... such as the following excerpt from a recent interesting election poll analysis piece. – Editor
Q. I am always frustrated by polls asking whether one is a liberal, moderate, or conservative. My feeling is that about two-thirds of Americans are liberal on social issues and conservative on economic issues. (In other words they are actually Libertarians.) Can’t you ask this question better? Even laying out “litmus test” questions on gun control, abortion, the effect of more or less taxes and deficits, gay marriage, national defense (foreign adventures), space exploration, size of government, global warming (and what to do about it, assuming it exists), etc. I fear that many people answer “moderate” because they are taking an average, so to speak, while having very strong but inconsistent and diverging opinions -- anything but moderate.
A. As you note, the standard ideology question assumes that most people are arrayed along a single left-right political dimension. For the reasons you point out, that doesn’t work for everyone. Unfortunately there is no simple solution to the problem, because we don’t have the luxury of asking a series of questions on every poll that could be used to classify people more precisely.
However, in a 2006 analysis we attempted to map our survey respondents onto a two-dimensional space with economic issues on one dimension and social issues on the other. Although the selection of questions we had to work with was not ideal, we found that the simple left-right continuum did not work for many people (about one-quarter of the public); 16% of Americans were economically liberal but socially conservative (sometimes called “populists”), while 9% were economically conservative and socially liberal (or “libertarian,” as you describe them). In addition, the analysis showed that about one-in-five people (18%) were “liberal” in both their social and economic views, while 15% were “conservative” on both dimensions. The plurality of respondents (42%) were “ambivalent,” offering a mixture of ideological views or expressing no opinion on several of the items we asked about.
(Response authored by Scott Keeter, Director of Survey Research, Pew Research Center; and Gregory Smith, Senior Researcher, Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life)
What you need to know about Sheriff Funds
Under the law two services that sheriffs provide are vital: Administration of jails and law enforcement. Arkansas Code § 14-14802(a) provides that: “A county government, acting through its quorum court, shall provide, through ordinance for… law enforcement services and the custody of persons accused or convicted of crimes”.
To assist in providing funding for law enforcement and jails there are certain dedicated sheriff funds. Below is a description of each fund, the proper use, and summaries of attorney general opinions on the following sheriff funds:
• Sheriff Communication Facility & Equipment Fund; • Sheriff Booking/Administration Fee Jail Fund; • Sheriff Fine Jail Fund; the County Jail Fund; • Boating and Safety Fund; • Sheriff Drug Enforcement Fund
“Sheriff Communication Facility &
Equipment Fund”: Arkansas Code § 21-6307 sets forth various fees collected by a Sheriff ranging from service of process fees to commissions for sales of real or personal property under execution of a writ. Seventy-five percent of all fees collected by the sheriff shall be paid into the county treasury in the manner provided by law, or to the person entitled to receive the money, or to his or her order, or to his or her attorney of record.
The remaining 25 percent of all fees collected by the sheriff shall be used by the sheriff to establish a special fund to be known as the “communications facility and equipment fund”. The purpose of the fund is to use for: (i) Train operations staff; (ii) Operate, equip, repair, or replace existing communications equipment; (iii) Purchase additional communications equipment; or (iv) Otherwise improve a communications facility or system for the sheriff’s department. The law also provides that at the discretion of the sheriff, any funds not needed by the sheriff for any of the purposes above may be transferred to the county general fund. Also, under Ark. Code § 12-41-105 100 percent of the commissions from prisoner telephone services provided at a jail shall be credited to the “Sheriff Communication Facility & Equipment Fund”.
A sheriff’s office may allocate up to 50 percent of the commissions deposited to the sheriff’s office communications facility and equipment fund for the maintenance and operation of the county jail (except in counties over 175,000 population). Attorney General Opinion No. 2002-008: explains that the law authorizes up to 50 percent to be used for the maintenance and operation of the jail, however, the remainder is to be used as provided by ACA 21-6-307(b) (2)(C): to operate, repair, purchase, equip or replace communication equipment, etc.
Also, Attorney General Opinion No. 2003074: illuminated that the 25 percent used to establish the communication facility and equipment fund under ACA 21-6-307 must be placed in an interest bearing account and may not simply be placed into the budget or a line item and used by the Quorum Court. An illegal exaction case may exist where funds that were supposed to be available to a sheriff under ACA 21-6-307 are misappropriated or misdirected. Attorney General Opinion No. 2004-277: found that phone cards may be sold to prisoners using commissary funds. Finally, Attorney General Opinion No. 2006124: stated that a sheriff may not enter into a binding contract for telephone service without authorization of the county judge; the commissions must be submitted to the county treasurer and placed into the sheriff’s facility equipment and communication fund.
David Chatman and the other jailers in the Boone County Detention Center depend on their communications equipment. A quarter of funds collected by the county sheriff is intended for a Communication Facility and Equipment Fund.
MARK WHITMORE
AAC Chief Counsel
“Sheriff Booking/Administration Fee
Jail Fund”: Ark. Code § 12-41-505 provides that “every person who may be convicted of a criminal offense shall pay the expenses in carrying him or her to jail and also for his or her support from the day of his or her initial incarceration for the whole time he or she remains there. The expenses which accrue shall be paid as directed in the act regulating criminal proceedings. Subsection (b) was enacted in 2007 and explicitly provides that a person convicted of a felony or a Class A misdemeanor shall be assessed a booking and administration fee of $20 which shall be assessed upon the conviction of a defendant and included in the judgment of conviction entered by the court. If a court suspends imposition of sentence on a defendant or places him or her on probation and does not enter a judgment of conviction, the court shall impose the booking and administration fee as a cost.
The booking and administration fee assessed under subdivision (b) shall be deposited into a special fund within the county treasury to be used exclusively for the maintenance, operation, and capital expenditures of a county jail or regional detention facility. Furthermore, the property of the person shall be subject to the payment of the expenses and the booking and administration fee. Attorney General Opinion No. 2007-304: determined that under current law a county that
does not operate or maintain a jail or regional jail and pays another detention to house their prisoners must reserve the booking and administration fee until such time as the county operates or maintains a jail or participates in a regional jail facility. Attorney General Opinion No. 2008088: explains that Ark. Code § 12-41-505 sets a mandatory fee for booking and administration and that: In the absence of a statutorily set fee or the delegation to allow for a fee for expenses of carrying a prisoner to jail, uncertainty exists on the manner in which to impose such a fee. Expenses for feeding and supporting prisoners is not set by law; a daily housing fee may be set and imposed by the quorum court by ordinance requiring convicted prisoners to pay for his or her support from the day of initial incarceration for the whole time the prisoner remains there.
The imposition and recovery of actual medical costs may be problematic {to the extent it is not an amount imposed by the judgment of conviction; and it not for an amount established by law such as the booking and administration fee}.
“Sheriff Hot Check Fund”: Ark. Code § 21-6-411(e) provides that: In those counties in which the sheriff is operating a hot check program and the prosecuting attorney is not operating such a program on September 20, 1985, the sheriff shall be entitled to continue the program as long as he or she elects to do so and the prosecuting attorney shall not initiate any such program in the county unless the sheriff discontinues his or her program. In those counties in which the Sheriff operates a hot check program, the Sheriff’s office shall be entitled to the same fees as provided in this section, but all fees shall be paid into an account for the sheriff’s office and shall be subject to appropriation by the quorum court to be used to defray the cost of the hot check program and other costs of the sheriff’s office. Fees collected under this law shall be deposited in a special fund to be administered by the prosecuting attorney or sheriff operating the hot check program.
“Sheriff Fine & Jail Fund”: In 2009 the General Assembly increased the ability of counties under Ark. Code § 16-17-129 to levy an additional and mandatory fine not to exceed $20 to be collected from each defendant upon each conviction, each plea of guilty or nolo contendere, or each bond forfeiture. A county ordinance enacted under this subdivision (b)(1) applies to all district courts in the county and all sums collected from the additional fine described in subdivision (b)(1) of this section as to cases in the first class shall be paid into the county treasury to be deposited into a fund to be used exclusively to help defray the cost of: (A) The construction, maintenance, and operation of the city, county, or regional jail; (B) Deferring the costs of incarcerating county prisoners held by a county, a city, or any entity; (C) The transportation and incarceration of city or county prisoners; (D) The purchase and maintenance of equipment for the city, county, or regional jail; and (E) Training, salaries, and certificate pay for jail personnel. (3) All sums collected from the additional fine described in subdivision (b)(1) of this section as to cases of the second class shall be paid into the county treasury to be deposited into a fund to be used exclusively to help defray the cost (A-E) above and for certificate pay for jailers and deputy sheriff’s.
Subsection (d) declares: “It is the intention of the General Assembly that the revenues derived from the additional fines levied under this section shall not offset or reduce funding from other sources for the maintenance, operation, and capital expenditures of the regional detention facilities; and the additional fine authorized in subsection (a) of this section shall apply to each charge, count, violation, or offense that a defendant pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, is found guilty of, or forfeits bond for, including each misdemeanor or traffic violation. Attorney General Opinion No.2009-172: explains that an ordinance by the quorum court establishing an additional fine not to exceed $20 for the jail under ACA 16-17-129 applies to all cases in the district court, the county docket and the city docket.
In the case of White County vs. City of Judsonia, 369 Ark. 151 (2007) the Supreme Court of Arkansas confirmed the authority under ACA 16-17-129 to provide counties the same authority to establish jail fines as allowed by cities. An ordinance of a city establishing an additional fine, not to exceed $20 for the jail under 16-17129 applies to only the city docket. Theses are separate fines.
Attorney General Opinion No.2009-059: found that if a county does not charge a city for keeping prisoners, the fine imposed by city ordinance under 16-17-129 is not required to be paid to the county, rather the fund may be used to help defray the costs of incarcerating city prisoners, including the costs of construction,
Funds: Continued from 43 >>>
maintenance of a city jail or payment to other entities for incarcerating city prisoners. A county may assess a daily fee for prisoners under ACA 12-41506 or county and city officials may enter into an agreement under 1241-503, including assignment of the fines under 16-17-129 collected by the city. If a county solely funds the district court, the funds collected by the city under a city fine ordinance must be paid unto the county treasury.
Attorney General Opinion No.2009-148: ACA 27-37-706 prohibits the imposition of additional fees or court costs for seat belt violations. However, ACA 27-37-706 does not prohibit the imposition of additional fines, such as may be established by the quorum court or city council under 16-17-129. If the county and/or city have enacted an additional fine, not to exceed $20, for each violation in district court under 16-17-129, it shall be assessed for seat belt violations.
Attorney General Opinion No. 2003-288: also determined that the fines established by the quorum court or city council under ACA 16-17-129 are mandatory. The district court judge must impose these fines just like all other fines under statute. Pursuant to ACA 16-17-132, 16-13-709 and 16-17-132 all fines, penalties and costs received shall continue to be collected and distributed in the manner provided by current laws affecting the district courts, unless and until the General Assembly establishes a new method of distribution. The governing body of a political subdivision that contributes to the expenses of a district court shall designate a county or city official, agency or department who shall be primarily responsible for the collection of all fines assessed in the district courts.
“Sheriff Boating Safety & Enforce-
ment Fund”: Ark. Code § 27-101-111(b) provides that fees issued for operation of a vessel on waters of this state shall be deposited into the county treasury to the credit of the boating safety and enforcement fund, if the sheriff of that county has established a patrol on the waterways within the county.
In the event the sheriff has not established a patrol on the waterways within the county and if either the county or any city or town within a county, or both, has established an emergency rescue service, each county treasurer shall deposit his county’s share of the total fees collected into the county emergency rescue fund for use exclusively by either the county or the cities within the county, or both, for operating and maintaining emergency rescue services within the county and cities within the county.
After the treasurer receives the funds, he shall divide the funds in the county emergency rescue fund equally among the county and the cities within the county, if any, having emergency rescue services. Otherwise, the fees shall be deposited into the Game Protection Fund for use by the Arkansas State Game and Fish Commission.
“Sheriff Drug Enforcement Fund”: Ark. Code § 14-21-201(a) provides: each quorum court may by ordinance establish a drug enforcement fund. The ordinance shall set a maximum amount for the fund, not to exceed $10,000. The drug enforcement fund shall be administered by the county sheriff in accordance with the provisions and procedures of this subchapter. All funds shall initially be deposited in a drug enforcement fund bank account. The bank account shall be established at a bank located in the State of Arkansas and authorized by law to receive the deposit of public funds. Subsection (b) provides: the source of all funds deposited in the drug enforcement fund shall be funds appropriated by the quorum court. The initial funding and any subsequent reimbursements to the drug enforcement fund shall be appropriated by the quorum court and subject to the normal disbursement procedures required by law. No funds from other sources, including seized property, shall be deposited into the drug enforcement fund. Ark. Code § 14-21-202 provides: drug enforcement funds may only be used for direct expenses associated with the investigation of the criminal drug laws of this state, such as, but not limited to, the purchase of evidence, payment of informants, relocation and/or security of witnesses, emergency supply purchases, and emergency travel expenses. Drug enforcement funds may not be used for equipment purchases or leasing, salaries or wages, professional services, training, or any other purpose not directly related to a criminal drug investigation. In addition, these funds may not be used for administrative costs associated with the sheriff’s office.
Ark. Code § 14-21-203(b) provides: if adequate appropriations and funds are available, the drug enforcement fund may be replenished upon presentation and approval of a claim as provided in the normal county disbursement procedures. The total amount of funds held in the drug enforcement fund bank account and cash funds held by the sheriff’s office shall not exceed the maximum amount established by the quorum court.
From the local level on up, we have to work together, county by county, for good and sustainable health care
Mike Beebe
Arkansas Governor
In February, I attended the winter meeting of the National Governors Association in Washington, DC. The Association has been meeting since 1908 and is comprised of the governors of all 50 states, the U.S. territories of American Samoa, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the commonwealths of the Northern Mariana Islands and Puerto Rico. The meeting provides a chance for the nation’s governors to come together for three days to talk about the issues we each face daily. We represent the voters of different states, and each of our states has its own demographics, economic and social characteristics, and challenges, but we can all benefit from sharing experiences and solutions. We also had the chance to meet with President Obama and first Lady Michelle Obama. In a way, the camaraderie and networking opportunities offered locally by the Association of Arkansas Counties serve a similar purpose for the public servants and elected officials who represent each of Arkansas’s 75 counties.
The economy and health-care reform dominated our discussions, but the tone of these conversations was very different than what many have come to expect out of Washington. These sessions were focused, pragmatic, insightful, and respectful. And almost always, they were bipartisan. Partisan politics create unnecessary and unproductive rifts based on a single form of identification and often delay or worse, deter, the policymaking progress.
America’s governors often work well together because we face similar challenges: Balancing budgets during tough times, helping our citizens find jobs, and reining in exploding Medicaid budgets. These problems aren’t very different from those facing the federal government, but governors deal with them on a more direct and everyday level, and that crafts our responses to them. In turn, county and city officials around the country deal with issues at the most local level. They operate closest to the citizens themselves and are often the first point of contact for Americans everywhere. In other words, they might be considered economic, infrastructural and social-issue first responders.
Most governors are prohibited from deficit spending, as none of us can print more money when we run short. As a result, governors of both parties tend to look for common-sense solutions to problems. Most important, neither party’s governors claim a monopoly on good ideas, especially when it comes to fixing health care. Ask any governor how to fix the health-care dilemma, and you will get the same answer: We have to control costs. Washington has focused its debate on health insurance reform, but governors understand that how we pay is less of a priority than how much we pay.
Arkansas’s Medicaid budget doubled between 2001 and 2009, growing from $1.9 billion to $3.7 billion in less than a decade. It has been expanding at an average of six percent a year for the past three years, and if left unchecked, Medicaid is anticipated to grow 8 to 10 percent a year for the next two years. This is unsustainable, because we cannot provide the revenue for the state’s share of Medicaid costs without cutting critical funding for schools or prisons, or by imposing new taxes.
We have to slow this growth, and we can’t wait for Washington to do it. To that end, I have tasked the Department of Human Services and Surgeon General Dr. Joe Thompson to work with hospitals, doctors, nursing homes, dentists, and mental-health providers in every Arkansas community to devise strategies for containing costs and slowing Medicaid growth while preserving services and our quality of care.
I believe that the “fee-for-service” model that we are using to pay for health care accelerates the rise in costs. It doesn’t provide doctors or patients with any incentive to improve efficiency or quality of care. We need to encourage and reward doctors for focusing on prevention, thereby reducing the need for hospitalizations.
We need to use technology to avoid unnecessary tests and improve diagnostics; but above all, we need to change the payment model for some of the care we’re providing – particularly for chronic diseases. We need to stop paying fees for the process of treatment, and instead reward the successful results of that treatment. This, I believe, will lead to a more efficient use of our resources and improved care.
As one of the doctors who spoke to us in Washington said, we need to “Pay well to do well, not pay more to do more.” The states are not going to wait for Congress to begin pursuing this approach. Arkansas will look to our sister states for good ideas and share our best practices with them, too. It won’t be easy, and it will require tough choices; but it’s time to move beyond rhetoric and find real solutions to a problem that affects us all.
Though health care reform might often seem like an intangible subject with little immediate relevance at the town and city level, local and county officials in fact are faced with a responsibility of their own. Be responsible and share with your communities that we must work together to reform this system and contain costs. It is up to each and every doctor, each and every patient, each and every hospital, in each and every community in the country to take the lead, and then to follow through with this new philosophy, if we are to ever succeed in this often overwhelming task.
Hon. Mike Beebe
Governor of Arkansas
Let’s get the mentally ill out of the county jail (and into the state hospital)
– Judge Tom Eisele, 6/2/6 Memorandum Opinion, Darin Winters v. Benton County, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, Case No. 4:04-CV-206
In the Winters case, the State of Arkansas represented: “Arkansas has adopted a reasonable and fair plan for providing mental health and psychiatric services for the indigent and uninsured acutely mentally ill.” Do not let your jail become a mental hospital by default. The result will be unnecessary operational expenses, unnecessary operational problems, unnecessary risk of injury, and unnecessary potential legal liability. If the Arkansas State Hospital refuses to accept your mentally ill jail detainee, call us so we can act to get the circuit judge to order the state to accept the person for mental health treatment.
Overview: When a person reasonably thought to be homicidal, suicidal or gravely disabled by reason of mental illness is encountered by an employee of the Sheriff (whether or not the mentally ill person is in custody) the employee of the Sheriff shall act to : 1) prevent unnecessary injury to the mentally ill person, himself, herself, others, 2) handle the mentally ill person with patience and in a manner which reflects dignity and concern for the person’s illness, 3) respect the legal fact that mentally ill persons are entitled to the same citizenship rights as individuals without mental illness, and 4) act to provide the mentally ill person taken into custody with necessary health care, including necessary mental health care. If necessary mental health care cannot be provided with the consent and/ or cooperation of the mentally ill person or if the mentally ill person is incompetent and thereby incapable of giving the consent required for necessary health care treatment, then the Sheriff or his employee shall petition the Circuit Court for an order of involuntary civil commitment to the Arkansas State Hospital or other health care treatment facility for necessary treatment. If the Arkansas State Hospital refuses to accept judicially-ordered admission of a person committed to the Arkansas State Hospital, the Sheriff or his employee should petition the Circuit Court for an order directing the Arkansas State Hospital to obey the Court’s order or be held in contempt of court.
Homicidal, Suicidal, or Gravely Disabled
Triggers Mental Health Arrest Authority: The issues in all law enforcement action are order, security, and peace. All arrests, including all mental health arrests, must be based upon a reason to believe a person has engaged in conduct that creates an order or security problem or disturbs the civil peace. A person is eligible for a Mental Health Arrest and/or for an Involuntary Civil Committee for mental health treatment “when as a result of a mental illness, disease, or disorder, he or she poses a “clear and present danger to himself or herself or others.” A.C.A. 20-47207(c). A person is a “clear and present danger to himself or herself or others,” and subject to a mental health arrest when the person is homicidal, suicidal, or gravely disabled as a result of mental illness:
Homicidal: The person has inflicted, attempted to inflict, or threatened to inflict serious bodily harm on another, and there is a reasonable probability that the conduct will occur if admission is not ordered.
Suicidal: The person has inflicted serious bodily injury on himself or herself or has attempted suicide or serious self-injury, and there is a reasonable probability that the conduct will be repeated if admission is not ordered [or] the person has threatened to inflict serious bodily injury on himself or herself, and there is a reasonable probability that the conduct will occur if admission is not ordered.
Gravely Disabled: The person’s recent behavior or behavior history demonstrates that he or she so lacks the capacity to care for his or her own welfare that there is a reasonable probability of death, serious bodily injury, or serious physical or mental debilitation if admission is not ordered.
Mental Health Arrest Can be Made (Without Making a Crimi-
nal Arrest): It is not necessary to make a criminal arrest in order to take in custody a person who is homicidal, suicidal, or gravely disabled as a result of mental illness. Arkansas Code Annotated 20-47-101 states “it shall be the duty of all peace officers to arrest any insane or drunken persons whom they may find at large and not in the care of some discreet person. The officer shall take him or her before some magistrate of the county, city, or town in which the arrest is made.” A.C.A. 12-11-110 states: “It shall be the duty of all peace officers to arrest any insane or drunken person, whom they may find at large and not in the care of some discreet person, and take him or her before some magistrate of the county, city, or town in which the arrest is made.” A.C.A. 2047-102 & 103 further state that “whenever any sheriff, coroner, or constable shall discover any person to be of unsound mind who resides in the county, it shall be his or her duty to make application to the circuit court ... [and] the court ... shall follow the procedure for the involuntary admission and treatment.” A.C.A. 20-47-210(a) states that if it is not safe for an interested citizen to take a person who is of danger to himself or herself or others as defined in A.C.A. 20-47207(c), it shall be the duty of law enforcement to transport the person to a hospital or to a receiving facility or program.
Mike Rainwater Risk Management Legal Counsel
Suggested Procedures for Persons NOT Al-
ready in Jail: The following steps are offered in an effort to formulate procedures for handling the mentally ill when encountered by county law enforcement or detention officers.
1. Mental Health Arrest Decision: All law enforcement officers who come into contact with a person they believe is “at large and not in the care of some discreet person” and is a “clear and present danger to himself or herself or others” (i.e., reasonably appears to be homicidal, suicidal, or gravely disabled) as a result of mental illness then a mental health arrest shall be made
as permitted by A.C.A. 20-47-101, 12-11-110, 20-47-102 & 103, 20-47-210(a), and 20-47207(c).
2. Mental Health Restraint & Transport
Decision: A.C.A. 20-47-210(a) states that if it is not safe for an interested citizen to take a person who is of danger to himself or herself or others as defined in A.C.A. 20-47-207(c), it shall be the duty of law enforcement to transport the person to a hospital or to a receiving facility or program. If the person subjected to a mental health arrest presents a potential for harm to himself or others, the law enforcement officer will restrain the person and conduct a search of the person to make sure no weapons are available to him or her. When time and circumstances permit, an EMS provider may be called to transport the person to a hospital or a mental health care facility or program. Prior to arrival at the facility, the officer will notify the staff as to the behavior of the person and the reason for mental health arrest. If an EMS provider is used for transport, then the officer will provide that information to the EMS provider. In any event, the normal paperwork required by the Sheriff for a criminal arrest shall be completed by the arresting officer with a notation made therein that the arrest was a mental health arrest.
3. Criminal Arrest Decision: If a person is homicidal, suicidal or gravely disabled but is NOT “at large” or is “IN the care of some discreet person,” then the only way that person could be lawfully arrested is to charge the person with any applicable criminal offense. If a person is NOT “clear and present danger to himself or herself or others” (i.e., reasonably appears to NOT be homicidal, suicidal, or gravely disabled), then the only way the person could be lawfully arrested is with an applicable criminal arrest. A person subjected to an appropriate mental health arrest may also be charged with any applicable criminal offense ... but ... it is not necessary, however, to charge a person who is “at large and not in the care of some discreet person” and is a “clear and present danger to himself or herself or others” (i.e., reasonably appears to be homicidal, suicidal, or gravely disabled) as a result of mental illness with a minor criminal offense (e.g., disorderly conduct or criminal trespass) in order to provide legal justification for the mental health arrest.
4. Mental Health Involuntary-Civil-Commitment Proceeding for Admission for Treat-
ment: A.C.A. 20-47-102 & 103 require that “whenever any sheriff, coroner, or constable shall discover any person to be of unsound mind who resides in the county, it shall be his or her duty to make application to the circuit court ... [and] the court ... shall follow the procedure for the involuntary admission and treatment.” If the person subjected to a mental health arrest is not accepted by the local hospital or other treatment facility for in-patient treatment, then the person subjected to a mental health arrest should be transported to the county jail for mental health detention. When any person subjected to a mental health arrest is detained in the county jail, the Sheriff (or his employee) must: 1) take the mental health care arrestee before a judge “without unnecessary delay” as required by Rule 8.1 of the Ark. Rules of Criminal Procedure and 2) “make application to the circuit court ... for involuntary admission and treatment” as required by A.C.A. 20-47-102 & 103. The law enforcement officer or other person should go to the prosecutor’s office to obtain the petition and file that petition with the Circuit Court asking the court to order the person person subjected to a mental health arrest involuntarily admitted for mental health treatment. This petition must include information showing that the person meets the homicidal, suicidal, or gravely disabled criteria stated in A.C.A. 20-47-207(c). If a person is not confined at the time of the petition and the petitioner shows evidence that the person named in the petition is a danger to himself or herself or others, then a petition for involuntary civil commitment can still be filed and a circuit judge can order law enforcement to transport the person to an appropriate treatment facility. The prosecutor represents the petitioner in the involuntary civil commitment proceeding, and the person named in the petition will be appointed counsel if he or she cannot afford an attorney.
5. Petition for Emergency Order Directing
Involuntary Admission: If an Order is issued and the designated receiving facility or program and/or the Arkansas State Hospital refuses to accept the detainee into its facility claiming lack of bed space and/or that the detainee is too violent or that the detainee does not qualify for admission (e.g., has medical treatment issues that disqualify admission into the Arkansas State Hospital), then the Sheriff should file a Petition for Emergency Order Directing Involuntary Admission with the Circuit Court asking the Circuit Court to order the designated receiving facility or program and/or the State Mental Hospital to immediately accept the person or suffer punishment for contempt of court. to formulate procedures for handling the mentally ill when encountered by county law enforcement or detention officers.
1. Involuntary-Civil-Commitment Pro-
ceedure for Admission for Treatment: A.C.A. 20-47-102 & 103 require that “whenever any sheriff, coroner, or constable shall discover any person to be of unsound mind who resides in the county, it shall be his or her duty to make application to the circuit court ... [and] the court ... shall follow the procedure for the involuntary admission and treatment.” This would apply to persons who are already in jail “whenever any sheriff ... shall discover any person to be of unsound mind who resides in the county [jail] , it shall be his or her duty to make application to the circuit court ... [and] the court ... shall follow the procedure for the involuntary admission and treatment.” The detention officer or other person should go to the prosecutor’s office to obtain the petition and file the petition for involuntary commitment with the Circuit Court asking the court to order the jail detainee involuntarily admitted for mental health treatment. This petition must include information showing that the person is of “unsound mind.” The prosecutor represents the petitioner in the involuntary civil commitment proceeding, and the person named in the petition will be appointed counsel if he or she cannot afford an attorney. 2. Petition for Emergency Order Directing Involuntary Admission: If an Order of involuntary civil commitment is issued by the Court and the designated receiving facility or program and/or the Arkansas State Hospital refuses to accept the detainee into its facility claiming lack of bed space and/or that the detainee is too violent or that the detainee does not qualify for admission (e.g., has medical treatment issues that disqualify admission into the Arkansas State Hospital), then the Sheriff should file a Petition for Emergency Order Directing Involuntary Admission with the Circuit Court asking the Circuit Court to order the designated receiving facility or program and/or the State Mental Hospital to immediately accept the person or suffer punishment for contempt of court.
(Mike Rainwater, a regular contributor to County Lines and lead attorney for AAC Risk Management, is principal shareholder of Rainwater, Holt, and Sexton, P.A., a state-wide personal injury and disability law firm. Mr. Rainwater has been a lawyer for over 30 years, is a former deputy prosecuting attorney, and has defended city and county officials for over 25 years)
