State of Arkansas, Appellant v. Jason Michael Johnson, Appellee

Summary

The court affirmed dismissal of the charges because Johnson entered an agreement not to prosecute, performed his obligation by obtaining the requested psychiatric evaluation, and detrimentally relied on the agreement by spending money and making statements that could not necessarily be neutralized by suppression. The court held that detrimental reliance is required to enforce a precharge agreement not to prosecute and that Johnson satisfied that requirement. Chief Justice Hannah, dissenting, would have dismissed the State's appeal and enforced the agreement without requiring detrimental reliance.