Hughes v. State
| Decision Date | 17 June 2015 |
| Docket Number | No. CR–14–1103,CR–14–1103 |
| Parties | Aaron Keith Hughes, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee |
| Court | Arkansas Court of Appeals |
2015 Ark. App. 378
467 S.W.3d 170
Aaron Keith Hughes, Appellant
v.
State of Arkansas, Appellee
No. CR–14–1103
Court of Appeals of Arkansas, DIVISION IV.
Opinion Delivered June 17, 2015
Gregory Crain, Malvern, for appellant.
No response.
Opinion
BART F. VIRDEN, Judge
On May 27, 2014, a Hot Spring County Circuit Court jury found Aaron Keith Hughes guilty of second-degree domestic battery. He was sentenced to six years in the Arkansas Department of Correction and was ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $752.85. A judgment was filed on May 30, 2014, and a timely notice of appeal followed.
Hughes's attorney has filed a motion to be relieved as counsel and a no-merit brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4–3(k) (2010), in which counsel asserts that there is no issue of arguable merit to support an appeal. Counsel provided his client with a copy of the motion and brief. Hughes did not file any pro se points for reversal, and the State elected not to file a brief with our court.
Facts
On May 25, 2014, immediately before the trial was set to begin, the circuit court held a hearing to address Hughes's request for a continuance. Hughes asserted that because he had conditionally retained counsel of his choice, Shane Ethridge, to replace his appointed attorney, Gregory Crain, he should be granted a continuance so that Ethridge could defend him on the charge brought against him.1 Hughes stated that he could pay Ethridge $1500 if the continuance was granted but that Ethridge had not been officially retained at that time. Previously, Hughes had sworn an affidavit that he was indigent. The court denied Hughes's request.
The trial took place immediately after the hearing. At the trial, the victim, Kyra Zatarain, described the events of the evening
of June 16, 2013. Zatarain testified that after vacationing together in California, she and Hughes had arrived home, and she was cooking dinner when Hughes's cousin became ill in the bathroom. When Zatarain tried to assist Hughes's cousin, Hughes refused to allow Zatarain to help and then became very angry. She testified that he pushed her up against the bathroom wall and choked her. Zatarain testified that later that evening, as the argument continued outside in the carport, he choked her again and then threw her against fence. She testified that she lost consciousness at some point in the evening. She stated that when she went to the doctor the next day, she was immediately transported to an orthopedic surgeon. She testified that her shoulder was injured so badly that it required surgery where four inches of bone was removed and that she also had a broken arm. Zatarain testified that she also suffered cuts, bruises and damage to her esophagus from Hughes strangling her and that she had permanent scars. At the time of trial, Zatarain was still in physical therapy. She testified that she could not work because of her injuries, and she no longer was able to play ball with her sons or participate in other normal activities. She testified that she had not been able to drive for six months after the incident. Zatarain testified that she also suffered emotional trauma and was in therapy for that as well.
Zatarain's son, seventeen-year-old Dakota Wilkinson, also testified. He stated that he saw Hughes choke his mom after she tried to help Hughes's cousin, and then later heard his mother and Hughes arguing. Wilkinson testified that he heard a loud banging noise, and when he went into his mom's bedroom to check on her, the dresser was broken and his mother was lying on the floor. He testified that when he reached his mother's room, Hughes walked away. He testified that his mother and Hughes argued again outside in the carport, and while he was watching through the kitchen window, he saw his mother's body hit the a fence. He testified that he ran outside to help her, asked Hughes to leave their home, and then put his mom in her bed. Wilkinson testified that shortly thereafter, his mother got out of bed to talk to Hughes and that Hughes threatened them with violence if they sought help. Wilkinson testified that Hughes then began to pack up his belongings, which took between thirty and forty minutes. Wilkinson testified that he went back inside, and Zatarain and Hughes were outside talking. He testified that was when he heard a gunshot and went outside to check on them again. Wilkinson testified that Hughes said the gun had accidentally gone off, and that he convinced Hughes it was time to leave because the police would probably be there soon to investigate. Wilkinson testified that Hughes left at that time.
Ashlee Brown, a former coworker of Zatarain's and former classmate of Hughes's, testified that during a conversation earlier that year Hughes recounted to her that he had thrown a woman into a fence after they had gotten into an argument.
At the end of the State's presentation of evidence, and then again at the end of all of the evidence, counsel for Hughes made a three-part motion for a directed verdict, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence that Hughes caused Zatarain's injury, that the injury was serious, and that the he and Zatarain were in a dating relationship and cohabitating. The motions were denied.
Standard of Review and Applicable Law
A request to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is wholly without merit shall be accompanied by a brief including
an abstract and addendum. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4–3(k)(1). The brief shall contain an argument section that consists of a list of all rulings adverse to the defendant made by the circuit court on all objections, motions and requests made by either party with an explanation as to why each adverse ruling is not a meritorious ground for reversal.Id. ; see also...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wheeler v. State
...injury to another person by means of a deadly weapon other than a firearm. See Ark. Code Ann. § 5–13–202(a)(2).24 Hughes v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 378, at 7, 467 S.W.3d 170, 175 (citing Bell v. State, 99 Ark. App. 300, 306, 259 S.W.3d 472, 476 (2007) ).25 Ark. Code Ann. § 5–2–202(1) (Repl. 2......
-
Johnson v. State
...injury, as the finder of fact may use its common knowledge to determine whether such injury occurred. See Hughes v. State , 2015 Ark. App. 378, at 8, 467 S.W.3d 170, 175 ; see also Johnson v. State , 26 Ark. App. 286, 764 S.W.2d 621 (1989) (the court held that although no medical testimony ......
-
Allen v. State, CR-18-415
...serious physical injury, as the finder of fact may use its common knowledge to determine whether such injury occurred. Hughes v. State , 2015 Ark. App. 378, 467 S.W.3d 170. ...
-
Houston v. State
... ... means of a firearm. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-13-201(a)(8) ... (Supp. 2021). This court has frequently stated that intent or ... state of mind is seldom capable of proof by direct evidence ... and must usually be inferred from the circumstances of the ... crime. Hughes v. State, 2015 Ark.App. 378, 467 ... S.W.3d 170; Taylor v. State, 77 Ark.App. 144, 72 ... S.W.3d 882 (2002). Because of the difficulty in ascertaining ... a defendant's intent or state of mind, a presumption ... exists that a person intends the natural and probable ... consequences of his ... ...