Michael Tornavacca v. State of Arkansas — Danielson, J., Concurring

Summary

Justice Danielson concurred in affirming the circuit court, reasoning that Tornavacca received adequate due process when he was notified of the alleged violations, appeared in court, and was allowed to explain them before removal from drug court and imposition of his sentence. The concurrence emphasized that drug court is a nonadversarial, team-based program in which the traditional roles of the participants change, while recognizing that minimum due-process protections remain required. Justice Brown, dissenting, would have held that Tornavacca was entitled to be present and heard before the staffing decision terminating his participation was made.