Knight v. State
| Decision Date | 08 November 1995 |
| Docket Number | No. CA,CA |
| Citation | 908 S.W.2d 664,51 Ark.App. 60 |
| Parties | , 104 Ed. Law Rep. 913 Eric KNIGHT, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. CR 94-1385. |
| Court | Arkansas Court of Appeals |
Wm. R. Simpson, Public Defender, Little Rock, for appellant.
Clint Miller, Asst. Attorney General, Savannah Dyer Law Student admitted to practice pursuant to Rule XV(E)(1)(b), Little Rock, for appellee.
The appellant was convicted in a bench trial of being a minor in possession of a handgun on school property in violation of Ark.Code Ann. § 5-73-119 (Repl.1993). He was sentenced to three years in the Arkansas Department of Correction with credit for one day jail time. On appeal, he argues that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. We agree and reverse.
In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State and affirm if the verdict is supported by substantial evidence. Bailey v. State, 307 Ark. 448, 821 S.W.2d 28 (1991). Substantial evidence is evidence which is of sufficient force and character that it will, with reasonable certainty, compel a conclusion one way or the other without resort to speculation or conjecture. Kendrick v. State, 37 Ark.App. 95, 823 S.W.2d 931 (1992). Circumstantial evidence may constitute substantial evidence; however, in order to be sufficient to sustain a conviction, the circumstantial evidence must exclude every other reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence. Sheridan v. State, 313 Ark. 23, 852 S.W.2d 772 (1993). This becomes a question for the fact finder to determine. Id.
At trial, Betty Rodden testified that she was a teacher and a coach at Sylvan Hills Junior High on December 4, 1992. On that day, she was in her seventh period study hall when Ms. Clark, the school principal, asked for the appellant. The appellant then left the classroom with Ms. Clark. Ms. Rodden testified that she subsequently saw the appellant return to the study hall. She further testified that as she was talking to another student, she observed the appellant at the front of the room standing beside a student by the name of B.J. Blake. They were standing next to each other and there was a black book bag on a table beside them. They separated and the appellant started toward the door as she was about to speak to them. She testified that as the appellant was leaving the room, another student said something to him and he responded something about a nine millimeter and "nothing on me." Ms. Rodden informed Ms. Clark of the conversation she overheard. She also told Ms. Clark that she witnessed the appellant and B.J. Blake making a "big deal" about the book bag as though they were putting something in it or taking something out of it.
Ms. Clark, the principal for Sylvan Hills Junior High, testified that she had gone to study hall to escort the appellant to the school bus as a preventative measure because there had been some problems at school that day. They left the study hall together. The appellant subsequently told her that he had forgotten his books and asked if he could go get them. However, he did not return from study hall with any books or a book bag. Ms. Clark further testified that after speaking with Ms. Rodden, she retrieved the book bag from the study hall and opened it in her office with the appellant present. At that time, she observed a handgun in the book bag and contacted a police officer.
The appellant contends that the State failed to prove that he was in possession of the weapon. A showing of constructive possession, which is the control or right to control the contraband, is sufficient to prove a defendant is in possession of a firearm. See Banks v. State, 315 Ark. 666, 869 S.W.2d 700 (1994). Constructive possession can be implied where the contraband was found in a place immediately and exclusively accessible to the accused and subject to his control. Crossley v. State, 304 Ark. 378, 802 S.W.2d 459 (1991); Sinks v. State, 44 Ark.App. 1, 864 S.W.2d 879 (1993). Constructive possession may be established by circumstantial evidence, but when such evidence alone is relied on for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. State
...evidence in the light most favorable to the appellee and affirm if the verdict is supported by substantial evidence. Knight v. State, 51 Ark.App. 60, 908 S.W.2d 664 (1995). Substantial evidence is that which is of sufficient force and character that it will, with reasonable certainty, compe......
-
Myers v. State, CACR 06-709 (Ark. App. 3/21/2007)
...which is the control or right to control the contraband, may be established by circumstantial evidence. See Knight v. State, 51 Ark. App. 60, 908 S.W.2d 664 (1995). However, when circumstantial evidence is alone relied on for a conviction, it must indicate guilt and exclude every other reas......
-
Mays v. State, CA
...the factfinder must not be left to speculation and conjecture. Carter v. State, 324 Ark. 395, 921 S.W.2d 924 (1996); Knight v. State, 51 Ark.App. 60, 908 S.W.2d 664 (1995). Although the question of whether circumstantial evidence excludes every other reasonable hypothesis other than the acc......
-
B.T. v. State
...may also affirm the court's determination that BT was a minor illegally in possession of a handgun. BT's citation to Knight v. State , 51 Ark. App. 60, 908 S.W.2d 664 (1995), is misplaced, as that case concerns constructive possession, which is not an issue here, and Knight does not address......