Brown v. State , 2016 Ark. App. 381 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                    Cite as 
    2016 Ark. App. 381
    ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
    DIVISION IV
    No. CR-15-1047
    DAMION RAYNELL BROWN                               Opinion Delivered   September 7, 2016
    APPELLANT
    APPEAL FROM THE CHICOT
    COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
    V.                                                 [NO. CR2014-94-1]
    HONORABLE SAM POPE, JUDGE
    STATE OF ARKANSAS
    APPELLEE        AFFIRMED
    PHILLIP T. WHITEAKER, Judge
    A Chicot County jury found appellant Damion Raynell Brown guilty of two counts
    of second-degree unlawful firearm discharge and of being a felon in possession of a firearm.1
    He was sentenced to ten years in the Arkansas Department of Correction on each firearm-
    discharge count and five years’ incarceration on the unlawful-possession-of-a-firearm count,
    to be served concurrently. On appeal, he argues that the evidence was insufficient to support
    his convictions on all three counts. Because Brown did not preserve these arguments for
    appeal, we affirm.
    This court has consistently held that Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 33.1
    requires that an appellant move for a directed verdict at the close of the State’s evidence and
    again at the close of all of the evidence, and that the failure to do so waives a challenge to the
    sufficiency of the evidence on appeal. Ballinger v. State, 
    2016 Ark. App. 177
    , 
    486 S.W.3d 239
    .
    1
    A third count of second-degree unlawful firearm discharge was nolle prossed prior
    to trial.
    Cite as 
    2016 Ark. App. 381
    In King v. State, 
    338 Ark. 591
    , 
    999 S.W.2d 183
    (1999), our supreme court specifically held
    that the failure to renew a motion for directed verdict after the close of the State’s rebuttal
    testimony waives the issue of sufficiency of the evidence. At trial, Brown moved for a directed
    verdict at the end of the State’s case and at the end of the defense’s case-in-chief; however,
    he failed to renew his motion at the close of all the evidence. Thus, we hold that Brown
    failed to preserve the question of the sufficiency of the evidence by failing to properly renew
    his motion for directed verdict after the State’s rebuttal testimony. Accordingly, we affirm.
    KINARD and HIXSON, JJ., agree.
    Wilson Law Firm, P.A., by: E. Dion Wilson, for appellant.
    Leslie Rutledge, Att’y Gen., by: Rebecca Kane, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: CR-15-1047

Citation Numbers: 2016 Ark. App. 381

Judges: Phillip T. Whiteaker

Filed Date: 9/7/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/3/2016