Convicted sex offender argues ‘coerced’ plea in circuit court

Ronnie Flow Jr. of Magnolia appeared Thursday in Columbia County Circuit Court to argue his case for a new trial. The 46-year-old in 2017 pleaded no contest to sexual assault against two juvenile family member.
Ronnie Flow Jr. of Magnolia appeared Thursday in Columbia County Circuit Court to argue his case for a new trial. The 46-year-old in 2017 pleaded no contest to sexual assault against two juvenile family member.

A Magnolia man convicted of sexual assault against two minor female family members now wants another shot against the Arkansas judicial system.

Appearing for a special hearing Thursday morning in Columbia County Circuit criminal court, 46-year-old Ronnie Flow Jr. now says that the May 30, 2017, no contest plea he entered for two counts of second-degree sexual assault in the same court was “coerced” due to the high levels of “duress” and “fear” he was under at the time.

The proceeding was scheduled after a Petition for Error Coram Nobis, more commonly known as a writ of Coram Nobis, was filed Sept. 19 on Flow’s behalf. The current inmate at the Arkansas Department of Corrections (ADC) in Newport is claimed be mildly mentally handicapped, only capable of reading at a first-grade level. He said Thursday he did not remember the name of the fellow inmate who helped him file the petition.

Since Flow in 2017 was convicted for sexually assaulting his daughter and step-daughter after a no contest plea, then sentenced to 25 years in prison, he was denied counsel for the this week’s hearing by Circuit Judge David W. Talley Jr.

If the writ were to be granted by Talley, Flow could possibly be eligible for a new trial, and/or, according to the Sept. 19 petition, “be released from his unlawful conviction, due to the actual innocense [sic] evidence brought forth.”

Flow in February 2016 was initially charged with two counts of rape in the case, but, in taking the state’s plea deal the following year, his charges were amended to the lesser sexual assault counts. According to the court records, the victims in the case were 11 and 13 in 2015 when the incidents were said to have occurred.

In his May 2017 sentencing order, Flow was stated to be ineligible for parole or early release since he was already a prior convicted felon for sexual assault-related crimes from the past. One of the previous victims, according to Deputy Prosecutor Ryan Phillips, was also stated to be 13.

Flow in court Thursday said that the victim the prosecutor mentioned was actually his legal wife at the time.

Also as part of his 2017 sentencing order, Flow is no longer able to be alone with any juveniles and cannot have any contact with the victims.

For his first witness Thursday, Flow, the petitioner and dressed in all-white prison garments, called himself to the stand after an extended conversation with Talley as to the guidelines of the legal proceeding.

Flow -- with pages of typed notes and reference materials in hand and occasionally reading them aloud -- took the stand and explained his reasoning for filing the petition.

In both his written petition and his oral testimony, Flow referred numerous times to being “coerced” into his confession, due to a variety of factors.

“I have been denied due process and fair treatment, in that I was not given a fair proceeding and felt severe distress and fear,” he said while under oath.

He later added: “I was told I wasn’t pleading guilty.”

Talley, citing the 1970 Supreme Court Case Alford v. North Carolina, informed Flow that he did not actually admit guilt to the sexual assault charges in his May 30, 2017, pleading, but instead accepted the state-negotiated charges and punishment since a jury trial would likely end in a worse fate for the defendant.

In Arkansas, the counts of rape charged against Flow initially could have netted him two life sentences from a Columbia County jury.

On June 27, 2017, Flow attempted to withdraw his no contest plea, but, by law, a plea may not be withdrawn after sentencing. When Talley explained the matter to Flow, he “objected” to the notion.

“You can object to what the law is if you want to,” the judge said.

The “duress” and “fear” Flow spoke of involved an alleged March 2016 incident with a Columbia County Sheriff’s Office deputy – later ruled as “hearsay” by the judge, another 2016 incident where an assigned social worker was fired, the death of his father in March 2017 where he was unable to attend the funeral, and his mother’s arrest for witness tampering.

“I was up under fear and duress because my mother was arrested,” Flow added. “That put a lot of strain on me because I was worried about her going to jail for something she wasn’t doing, but trying to do the right thing.”

During a cross-examination by Phillips, it was revealed that Flow’s daughters gave statements detailing the sexual acts performed on them that included intercourse. Family members were later said to have visited with them after being ordered not to.

As the hearing moved along, attorney Garnet Norwood of Texarkana, Flow's legal rep at the time of the plea deal, took the stand and told Phillips that he went over everything properly with Flow before the May 30, 2017, no contest plea.

The 50-plus year criminal attorney said that the only “fear” he could think of affecting Flow would have been the prospect of having all the evidence in the case, including his prior sexual assault convictions against minors, being revealed in a trial.

“The jury would have heard the record and he feared — and I feared for him — a life sentence,” said Norwood.

The attorney later said that “without question” Flow would have received harsher sentencing from a Columbia County jury and that it was within his best interest to accept the no contest plea.

On the morning of the pleading, Norwood said he reviewed the agreement with Flow and he did so willingly.

“I saw no coercion, but I was not involved as his attorney during some of the times he talks about,” Norwood added. “Anything I said on that would be hearsay.”

As the hearing closed, Talley said he would review what he heard before him Thursday and a decision on whether the testimony would meet the standards for a writ of Error Coram Nobis.

The judge though, did not give a specific date on when the decision would be finalized.

Upcoming Events