Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Fain v. State
Citations: 286 Ark. 35; 688 S.W.2d 940; 1985 Ark. LEXIS 2012Docket: CR 84-196
Court: Supreme Court of Arkansas; May 13, 1985; Arkansas; State Supreme Court
David Fain, an inmate, petitioned for a writ of mandamus against A. L. Lockhart, Director of the Arkansas Department of Correction, seeking a recalculation of his parole eligibility after being deemed ineligible due to multiple felony convictions. The trial court denied his petition, confirming Fain's status as a fourth offender based on his history of four convictions, resulting in a total sentence of 65 years. Fain argued that only his last sentence of 20 years should be valid and claimed that the relevant statute, Ark. Stat. Ann. 43-2829(B)(5), was void for vagueness. This statute specifies that fourth offenders, who have committed four or more felonies and have served multiple prison sentences, are not eligible for parole. The court found the statute sufficiently clear, meeting the constitutional vagueness test established in Lovell v. State, which requires statutes to provide definite standards for conduct and enforcement. Fain's assertion that the trial court intended to discharge his previous sentences was rejected, as the court noted that such intent was not supported by the record and that the trial court lacked the authority to alter existing sentences. Additionally, Fain contended that Act 93 of 1977 improperly allowed the Department of Correction to determine sentence lengths; however, the court affirmed that it is within the Department's prerogative to determine parole eligibility based on imposed sentences. The court ultimately affirmed the trial court's decision.