Background
Police searched King’s property under a warrant and found more than ten grams of methamphetamine, individual baggies, a portable scale, apparent marijuana, and suspected pills in a shed. King said the shed and its contents were hers, then waived her Miranda rights and stated that she was trying to sell drugs to pay bills.
At trial, King testified that she had two prior drug-related felonies but denied committing the charged offenses. She said she claimed the drugs to protect her niece and had found the items the day before the search. On cross-examination, the State introduced certified copies of King’s 2013 and 2021 drug convictions over defense counsel’s objection that the case was “not in sentencing.”
The Court’s Holding
The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed King’s convictions for possession of more than ten grams of methamphetamine with purpose to deliver and possession of drug paraphernalia. It held that King’s appellate challenge to the admission of her prior convictions was not preserved.
At trial, counsel did not object on Arkansas Rule of Evidence 404(b), improper-character-evidence grounds, or challenge the circuit court’s conclusion that King had opened the door to the evidence. Because an appellant may not change the basis of an objection on appeal, the court did not reach King’s claimed evidentiary error or her harmless-error argument.
Key Takeaways
- An objection must identify the particular asserted error to preserve it for appeal.
- A general objection that evidence belongs only at sentencing does not preserve a Rule 404(b) or character-evidence challenge.
- Failure to preserve the underlying evidentiary issue also forecloses appellate review of harmless error.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the need for criminal-defense counsel to make timely, specific evidentiary objections and obtain rulings on each theory. An appellate court will not consider a more developed Rule 404(b) argument when that argument was not made in the trial court.