Reeves v. State
| Decision Date | 27 April 1953 |
| Docket Number | No. 4729,4729 |
| Citation | 222 Ark. 77,257 S.W.2d 278 |
| Parties | REEVES v. STATE. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
No attorney for appellant.
Tom Gentry, Atty. Gen. and Thorp Thomas, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
The appellant was charged with, and convicted of, the crime of carnal abuse, Sec. 41-3406, Ark.Stats. The motion for new trial contains seven assignments, which we group and discuss:
I. Sufficiency Of The Evidence. Assignments 1, 2, and 3 present this issue. The age of the girl was shown to be 13 years, and a physician testified as to a physical examination of her. Appellant's signed confession was introduced as to the crime charged. The girl was called as a defense witness, and admitted the crime had been committed by the appellant. The evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict. See Wadlington v. State, 216 Ark. 914, 227 S.W.2d 940; and Clack v. State, 213 Ark. 652, 212 S.W.2d 20.
II. Instructed Verdict. In Assignment No. 6, the appellant complains of the refusal of the Court to give an Instructed Verdict at the close of the State's case. The appellant did not stand on his motion: instead, he offered evidence which, with the other evidence, was sufficient to sustain the conviction, as we stated in Topic I.
Our cases hold that when the defendant offers evidence after the refusal of such a motion, then the sufficiency of the evidence is determined by all of the evidence, and not merely that portion which has been presented when the motion was denied. Grooms v. Neff Harness Co., 79 Ark. 401, 96 S.W. 135; Ft. Smith Cotton Oil Co. v. Swift & Co., 197 Ark. 594, 124 S.W.2d 1; Rice v. Moudy, 217 Ark. 816, 233 S.W.2d 378. While the cited cases are civil cases, the same rule applies in criminal cases. See Robins v. U. S., 8 Cir., 262 F. 126; and see also Annotation in 17 A.L.R. 925, where cases from many jurisdictions are cited to sustain the statement:
'In jurisdictions where it is held to be the duty of the court, in a proper case, to direct an acquittal, it is the general rule that, if the entire evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction, the introduction of evidence by the defense, after the court has refused to direct a verdict of acquittal at the close of the prosecution's case, amounts to a waiver of the motion to direct.'
III. Instructions. In Assignments 4 and 5, appellant complains of the refusal of the Court to give his requested Instructions Nos. 1 and 2; and in Assignment No. 7, appellant complains of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. State
...is rendered unnecessary for he introduced evidence and testified himself, thus waiving that motion for a directed verdict. Reeves v. State, 222 Ark. 77, 257 S.W.2d 278. His own testimony shows that he was present and participating in the shooting of the three hogs; that after leaving, the a......
-
Walker v. State
...the conclusion of all of the evidence in the case. There is ample authority that such a failure amounts to a waiver. See Reeves v. State, 222 Ark. 77, 257 S.W.2d 278; Prosser v. United States, 265 F. 252 (8th Cir. Point 2: Proof made as to other convictions. Counsel for appellant, on direct......
-
Blankenship v. State, 4852
...at the close of the State's case. When the motion was denied, he introduced no evidence, so did not waive his motion. See Reeves v. State, 222 Ark. 77, 257 S.W.2d 278.3 For other cases to the same effect, see Huffman v. State, 222 Ark. 319, 259 S.W.2d 509; and Eoff v. State, 218 Ark. 109, 2......
-
Murphy v. State
...is viewed in the light most favorable to the jury verdict, we find substantial evidence to support the conviction. See Reeves v. State, 222 Ark. 77, 257 S.W.2d 278 (1953). ...