Fink v. State

• Decision Date: 24 September 2015
• Docket Number: No. CR–14–992,CR–14–992
• Citation: 469 S.W.3d 785,2015 Ark. 331
• Parties: Cheyenne Fink, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

2015 Ark. 331
469 S.W.3d 785

Cheyenne Fink, Appellant
v.
State of Arkansas, Appellee.

No. CR–14–992

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

Opinion Delivered September 24, 2015

Gina H. Reynolds, Arkansas Public Defender Commission, for appellant.

Leslie Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: Rebecca Kane, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.

Opinion

RHONDA K. WOOD, Associate Justice

Cheyenne Fink appeals the judgment and order finding her guilty of first-degree murder and sentencing her to life imprisonment. On appeal, Fink contends that the circuit court erred when it denied her motions for directed verdict because the State failed to present sufficient evidence that she acted with the purpose of causing Cole's death and Fink proved by a preponderance of the evidence that she suffered from mental disease or defect that prevented

469 S.W.3d 787

her from conforming her behavior. Appellant also argues that comments made by the State during closing argument violated her right to a fair trial. We find no error and affirm.

I. Relevant Facts

On the morning of December 3, 2012, seventeen-year-old Fink told her mother that she was leaving their home to go for a walk. During her walk, Fink encountered eighty-year-old Loyd Cole. Fink stabbed Cole thirty-six times with a knife she was carrying. Cole died as a result of the stab wounds and his body was found face up in a ditch. Fink left a trail of blood running from the body to the front steps of her house.

When Fink returned home, she was short of breath and had a large cut on her left arm. Her mother examined her daughter's cut and called her husband to come home. Fink took a shower and asked her mother to wash her clothes. When her father arrived home, police were outside examining the trail of blood leading to the home. He told the police officers that the blood was his daughter's and that she had cut herself.

The police obtained a search warrant for the Fink home. They discovered several knives in Fink's bedroom, including one under Fink's pillow, and bloodstained clothes in the washing machine. Blood samples taken from the knife and Fink's pants matched Cole's DNA. The police interviewed Fink but she denied killing Cole, stating that that she did not recall seeing him that day. She told police that she cut herself because she missed her deceased brother and had planned to kill herself that morning.

The State filed first-degree-murder charges against Fink. At trial, Fink asserted the defense of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect; but, after the jurors heard the testimony of expert witnesses on both sides, they rejected the defense and found Fink guilty of first-degree murder. Fink was sentenced to life imprisonment. Thus, this court's jurisdiction is pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 1–2(a)(2) (2014).

II. Sufficiency

Fink argues that the circuit court erred by not granting her motion for directed verdict because the State failed to introduce substantial evidence that, given her mental condition, she acted with the purpose of causing death to Cole. The State disagrees. A directed verdict is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. Durham v. State, 320 Ark. 689, 693, 899 S.W.2d 470, 473 (1995). In reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we determine whether the verdict is supported by substantial evidence, direct or circumstantial. Malone v. State, 364 Ark. 256, 261, 217 S.W.3d 810, 813 (2005). Substantial evidence is that which is of sufficient force and character that it will, with reasonable certainty, compel a conclusion one way or the other, without resorting to speculation or conjecture. Id. This court does not weigh the evidence presented at trial or assess the credibility of the witnesses, as those are matters for the fact-finder. Mathis v. State, 2012 Ark. App. 285, at 4–5, 423 S.W.3d 91, 95. The trier of fact is free to believe all or part of any witness's testimony and may resolve questions of conflicting testimony and inconsistent evidence. Id. On appeal from a denial of a directed verdict, this court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the appellee, in this case, the State, and affirms if there is substantial evidence to support the verdict. Id.

A person commits murder in the first degree if, with the purpose of causing the

469 S.W.3d 788

death of another person, the person causes the death of another person. See Ark. Code Ann. § 5–10–102(a)(2) (Repl. 2013). A person acts purposely with respect to his or her conduct or as a result of his conduct when it is his conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause the result. See Ark. Code Ann. § 5–2–202(1)...