Clarifying Jurisdictional Limits on Juror Misconduct Appeals Under Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure–Criminal 2(b)(2)

Introduction

In Eathan Cypert v. State of Arkansas (2025 Ark. 11), the Supreme Court of Arkansas addressed two critical appellate‐procedure questions in a first‐degree murder conviction: (1) whether a failure to amend a notice of appeal under Ark. R. App. P.–Criminal 2(b)(2) deprived the Court of jurisdiction to review a post‐trial juror‐misconduct claim, and (2) whether the trial court erred by refusing to give a jury instruction on second‐degree murder. The appellant, Eathan Cypert, was convicted of killing his wife with an AR-15 rifle and received a sentence of life imprisonment plus 15 years. On appeal, Cypert alleged juror misconduct during deliberations and sought a lesser‐included‐offense instruction. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, clarifying the strict deadlines for amending a notice of appeal and reaffirming the standard for lesser‐included‐offense instructions in murder cases.

Summary of the Judgment

The Court’s opinion, delivered by Associate Justice Nicholas J. Bronni, resulted in two holdings:

Jurisdictional Bar on Juror‐Misconduct Claim: Because Cypert filed his notice of appeal before the denial of his motion for a new trial and never amended that notice within thirty days under Rule 2(b)(2), the Supreme Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to consider his juror‐misconduct argument.
Second-Degree Murder Instruction: The Court found no “slightest evidence” that Cypert acted with less than a purposeful intent to kill. All of the evidence established that he knowingly and deliberately shot his wife; therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing a second‐degree murder instruction.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

Nance v. State, 2014 Ark. 201 (jurisdictional requirement for notice of appeal).
LaRue v. LaRue, 268 Ark. 86 (court’s duty to determine jurisdiction).
Wright v. State, 359 Ark. 418 (timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional).
Echols v. State, 2016 Ark. 225 (no review of unappealed post‐trial motion).
Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure–Criminal 2 (rules governing timing and amendment of notices of appeal).
Ark. Code Ann. § 16-91-113(a) & (b) (party-presentation principle and scope of appellate review in life‐sentence cases).
Ayala v. State, 365 Ark. 192 (2006) and Winkle v. State, 310 Ark. 713 (1992) (rare exceptions when a defendant is completely deprived of a trial).
Jury‐instruction cases on lesser‐included offenses: Goehler (2023), Britt (2001), Wyles (2004), Morris (2003), among others.
Fed. R. Evid. 606(b) and Ark. R. Evid. 410 (rules on juror testimony and plea negotiations).

Legal Reasoning

1. Jurisdiction to Review Juror Misconduct. Under Ark. R. App. P.–Criminal 2(a), a notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days of the judgment. Rule 2(b)(2) provides that when a notice is filed before post‐trial motions are decided, it “appeals the underlying judgment” and may be treated as if filed after those motions—only if the appellant amends it within thirty days of the post‐trial ruling. Cypert timely appealed the conviction (January 29 → February 12, 2024) but did not amend after the trial court denied his new‐trial motion on February 27 → March 28 deadline. Thus, no appeal was perfected from that denial, and the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction over the juror misconduct claim.

The Court rejected arguments to override this result. Ark. Code Ann. § 16-91-113(a) codifies the “party‐presentation” principle—courts review only issues briefed by the appellant except in life or death cases—yet says nothing about jurisdiction. Nor does § 113(b) permit appeal of unappealed post‐trial rulings; it governs issue preservation. The Court declined to extend the extreme‐circumstances exceptions of Ayala and Winkle, which involved total denial of any trial, to a case of alleged taint in jury deliberations.

2. Second-Degree Murder Instruction. Arkansas law requires a defendant to point to the “slightest evidence” supporting a lesser‐included offense. First-degree murder demands purposeful intent to kill; second-degree murder requires only that the defendant knowingly engaged in conduct manifesting extreme indifference to life. Here, the evidence showed that Cypert:

Pursued his wife outside after an argument;
Fired six high‐velocity rifle shots, two of which penetrated walls and four of which struck his wife;
Delivered fatal wounds consistent with purposeful aiming;
Did not attempt to render aid (and left the scene);
Denied knowledge and lied to police, while his clothing bore gunshot residue.

No evidence suggested a stray shot, “warning” shot, or accident. Consequently, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing a second‐degree instruction.

Impact

This decision underscores the strictness of procedural deadlines in criminal appeals:

Appellants must carefully track post‐trial motions and amend notices of appeal when necessary under Rule 2(b)(2).
Arkansas courts will not ignore jurisdictional defaults, even in serious criminal cases.

On substantive law, the ruling reaffirms Arkansas’s high bar for lesser‐included‐offense instructions in murder trials—defendants must supply affirmative evidence of a lesser mental state. Finally, the case signals that alleged juror misconduct—especially involving impermissible plea‐negotiation evidence—may go unreviewed absent procedural compliance, placing a premium on vigilance at every stage of the trial and post‐trial process.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Notice of Appeal: The formal document an appellant files to ask the appellate court to review a trial‐court decision.
Jurisdictional Rule (Criminal 2): A notice filed before post‐trial motions only covers the underlying judgment unless amended within 30 days of the post‐trial ruling.
First- vs. Second-Degree Murder: First degree = intentional (“purposeful”) killing; second degree = knowing conduct that almost certainly causes death, but without specific intent to kill.
Lesser-Included Offense Instruction: A jury instruction on a crime with fewer elements than the charged crime; permitted only if “slightest evidence” supports it.
Juror Misconduct & Juror Testimony: Arkansas generally bars inquiry into deliberations (Ark. R. Evid. 606(b)), except for extraneous information (e.g., unauthorized evidence about plea talks).

Conclusion

Eathan Cypert v. State of Arkansas crystallizes two enduring principles in criminal appeals: strict adherence to procedural rules for preserving issues—particularly the amendment requirement of Rule 2(b)(2)—and the rigorous standard for obtaining a lesser‐included‐offense instruction in murder prosecutions. Trial and appellate counsel must monitor post‐trial deadlines carefully and marshal affirmative evidence when seeking a second‐degree murder instruction. This decision will guide litigants and courts in Arkansas on the fine line between procedure and substance in criminal appeals.