Background
A Little River County jury convicted Clifton Roberts of delivering methamphetamine. The evidence included a controlled buy in which a confidential informant exchanged $250 for a bag of methamphetamine, recorded by two cameras. A crime-lab employee testified that the substance weighed 9.8045 grams and tested positive for methamphetamine.
The State also proved that Roberts had five prior felony convictions. The jury sentenced him as a habitual offender to forty years in prison. Although the circuit court did not mention forfeiture when pronouncing sentence, the later sentencing order stated that all seized or confiscated items were forfeited to the “9W Judicial District.”
The Court’s Holding
The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed Roberts’s conviction because he did not challenge it. But it held that the forfeiture language was an unauthorized and illegal part of the sentence.
The record showed no property had been seized or confiscated in connection with the case, leaving nothing for the circuit court to forfeit. Moreover, forfeiture was not pronounced at sentencing and appeared for the first time in the written sentencing order. Roberts could raise that issue on appeal because he had no prior opportunity to object, and an illegal sentence may be challenged for the first time on appeal.
Key Takeaways
- A court cannot order forfeiture where the record identifies no seized or confiscated property.
- A sentencing provision first appearing in the written order may be reviewed on appeal when the defendant had no opportunity to object.
- The court remanded only to remove the forfeiture provision; Roberts’s conviction and forty-year prison sentence remain intact.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces that sentencing orders must conform to the sentence authorized by law and supported by the record. An unauthorized add-on in a written sentencing order can be corrected without disturbing an otherwise valid conviction or sentence.