{
  "id": 3557686,
  "name": "William Greg SMITH v. STATE of Arkansas",
  "name_abbreviation": "Smith v. State",
  "decision_date": "2005-10-13",
  "docket_number": "CR 05-202",
  "first_page": "456",
  "last_page": "457",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "363 Ark. 456"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "215 S.W.3d 626"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "353 Ark. 641",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1155473
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2003,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/353/0641-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "271 S.W. 327",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.",
      "year": 1925,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "168 Ark. 603",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8724113
      ],
      "year": 1925,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/168/0603-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "357 Ark. 623",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        5401360
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 2004,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/357/0623-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-304",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "Ark. Code Ann.",
      "weight": 4,
      "year": 1997,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-303",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "Ark. Code Ann.",
      "weight": 6,
      "year": 2003,
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 206,
    "char_count": 2520,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.788,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.6060915559780326e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6846681022715996
    },
    "sha256": "7595e667bda0d361b4d7df684bd90557b8de1146428dfe8382e3bfb735a70cc1",
    "simhash": "1:afc1fd17c49dd855",
    "word_count": 440
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:29:41.293594+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William Greg SMITH v. STATE of Arkansas"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Jim Hannah, Chief Justice.\nWilliam Greg Smith appeals his conviction for engaging a child in sexually explicit conduct for use in a print medium. Smith raises one issue on appeal. He alleges that Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-303 (Supp. 2003) is unconstitutionally vague as applied to the facts of this case. However, while he moved below in the circuit court and obtained a ruling on the constitutionality of Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-304 (Repl. 1997), he did not do so with respect to Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-303. We affirm for failure to obtain a ruling on the issue of the constitutionality of Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-303 in the circuit court.\nOn June 21, 2004, Smith filed a motion to declare Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-304 unconstitutional \u201cas being overly broad and vague.\u201d This motion was noted by the court in a hearing on April 22, 2004, and taken under submission on that date. In a letter dated November 18, 2004, the circuit court stated:\nThe Court next considered the Defendant\u2019s Motion to Declare Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-304 Unconstitutional as Being Overly Broad and Vague.\nBased upon the matters presented and argument of counsel, this motion is denied.\nAt trial, Smith renewed this motion on the constitutionality of the \u201cstatute involved.\u201d No mention of Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-303 was made by Smith, and the prior motion referenced was on Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-304.\nThere was no ruling below on the constitutionality of Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-303. We have repeatedly stated that we will not address arguments raised for the first time on appeal. Gwin v. Daniels, 357 Ark. 623, 184 S.W.3d 28 (2004); Fair Store No. 23 v. Denison, 168 Ark. 603, 271 S.W. 327 (1925). While this court desires to reach all issues presented to it, this issue was not preserved for appellate review. Appellate jurisdiction means that this court has jurisdiction to review an order or decree of a lower court. Lewellen v. Sup. Ct. Comm. On Prof'l Conduct, 353 Ark. 641, 110 S.W.3d 263 (2003). We do not decide issues that were not decided by the lower court. Gwin, supra. Because the circuit court did not rule on the issue of the constitutionality of Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-27-303, there is nothing for this court to review on this appeal.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Jim Hannah, Chief Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Montgomery, Adams & Wyatt, PLC, by: Dale E. Adams, for appellant.",
      "Mike Beebe, Att\u2019y Gen., by: Vada Berger, Ass\u2019t Att\u2019y Gen., for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William Greg SMITH v. STATE of Arkansas\nCR 05-202\n215 S.W.3d 626\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered October 13, 2005\n[Rehearing denied November 17, 2005.]\nMontgomery, Adams & Wyatt, PLC, by: Dale E. Adams, for appellant.\nMike Beebe, Att\u2019y Gen., by: Vada Berger, Ass\u2019t Att\u2019y Gen., for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0456-01",
  "first_page_order": 480,
  "last_page_order": 481
}