David Waldon Paschal v. State of Arkansas — Danielson, J., Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part

Summary

Justice Danielson concurs in reversing and dismissing the sexual-assault convictions but dissents from affirming the witness-bribery conviction. He reasons that the offer to pay the alleged victim to "drop the charges" was not shown to be intended to influence testimony and that construing it as witness bribery improperly expands the criminal statute. Justices Brown and Baker separately dissent from the reversal of the sexual-assault convictions and would uphold the statute as applied to a teacher’s sexual relationship with an enrolled student.