White v. State, CR78-200

Decision Date17 September 1979
Docket NumberNo. 2,No. CR78-200,CR78-200,2
Citation585 S.W.2d 952,266 Ark. 499
PartiesRobert Lee WHITE, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Mark W. Nichols, Little Rock, for appellant.

Steve Clark, Atty. Gen. by Catherine Anderson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, for appellee.

HOLT, Justice.

In accordance with a jury verdict, appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment for rape (see Ark.Stat.Ann. § 41-1803 (Repl.1977)), 20 years for burglary (see Ark.Stat.Ann. § 41-2002 (Repl.1977)), and 20 years for criminal attempt to commit first degree murder (see Ark.Stat.Ann. §§ 41-701, 41-703 and 41-1502 (Repl.1977)). The sentences are to run consecutively.

Appellant first contends, through present counsel, that there is no substantial evidence to support the conviction of attempt to commit murder in the first degree. On appellate review, we affirm if there is any substantial evidence, when viewed most favorably to the appellee, to support the jury's findings. Pope v. State, 262 Ark. 476, 557 S.W.2d 887 (1977); and Merritt v. State, 258 Ark. 558, 528 S.W.2d 365 (1975). § 41-701 provides:

A person attempts to commit an offense if he:

(b) purposely engages in conduct that constitutes a substantial step in a course of conduct intended to culminate in the commission of an offense whether or not the attendant circumstances are as he believes them to be.

§ 41-1502 provides:

(1) A person commits murder in the first degree if:

(a) acting alone or with one or more other persons, he commits or attempts to commit a felony, and in the course of and in the furtherance of the felony, or in immediate flight therefrom, he or an accomplice causes the death of any person under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life; or

(b) with the premeditated and deliberated purpose of causing the death of another person, he causes the death of any person.

Appellant argues that his conviction cannot be sustained under either subsection of § 41-1502(1) in that the state did not prove premeditated and deliberated conduct as required under subsection (b), and that there is no "attempted felony murder rule in Arkansas" as codified in subsection (a). Appellee responds that the two subsections, however, are set forth in the alternative. Therefore first degree murder may be proven under either, and appellant attempted to commit murder as defined in section (a).

According to the Commentary, § 41-1502(1)(a) "carries forward the felony murder doctrine. The Code provision differs from earlier law in that liability arises for a killing in the course of and in furtherance of Any felony . . . ." The intent to kill is immaterial. The scope of the statute has been limited only by a requirement that the death occur under "circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life." Appellant relies on pre-code cases in support of his assertion that the crime of attempted felony murder, as charged here, does not exist. However, in Stout v. State, 263 Ark. 355, 565 S.W.2d 23 (1978), a case under the present code, there was, as here, no actual killing. We affirmed the life sentence of the accused for attempted capital murder of a police officer citing § 41-701 Supra, combined with § 41-1501. It follows that sufficient proof of an attempt to kill a person as defined by §§ 41-701 and 41-1502(1)(a) constitutes a criminal offense.

In the case at bar the evidence is amply substantial to support the conviction of criminal attempt to commit murder. At approximately 3 a. m., appellant entered the Ballance home through a window. Mrs. Ballance and her children were asleep in the living room. During the 30 to 40 minutes appellant was inside the house, he continuously threatened to kill members of the Ballance family. He periodically aimed his gun at various members and fired two shots at Mr. Ballance, barely missing him on both occasions. Mr. Ballance testified that one bullet "was close, just above my head . . ." "(Y)ou could feel it." Appellant, identified by the Ballances, then raped Mrs. Ballance. Certainly the jury could find that the shots constituted a "substantial step in a course of conduct intended to culminate in the commission of (the) offense" of murder "in the course of and in the furtherance of the" commission of the felonies of burglary and rape "under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life". See §§ 41-701 and 41-1502(1)(a). Appellant also argues that the shots were fired merely as warnings and that there were numerous opportunities to kill Mr. Ballance had that been his intent. It was for the jury to resolve any discrepancies, conflicts and inconsistencies in the testimony of the witnesses. Scott v. State, 254 Ark. 271, 492 S.W.2d 902 (1973); and Stout v. State, supra.

Appellant also contends that there is no substantial evidence to support the conviction for burglary. He argues that the appellee failed to prove that he entered the house with the purpose of committing a felony. Ark.Stat.Ann. § 41-2002 (Repl.1977) provides:

(1) A person commits burglary if he enters or remains unlawfully in an occupiable structure of another person with the purpose of committing therein any offense punishable by imprisonment.

The evidence previously recited is amply substantial to sustain the jury's finding that appellant committed the offense of burglary.

Appellant's next contention for reversal relates to the sufficiency of an instruction. The court instructed the jury in the statutory language which defines criminal attempt. § 41-701. Appellant argues that the court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the underlying offense of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • State v. Kimbrough
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • 3 Junio 1996
    ...171 (1983); State v. Bell, 785 P.2d 390 (Utah 1989); State v. Carter, 44 Wis.2d 151, 170 N.W.2d 681 (1969). But see White v. State, 266 Ark. 499, 585 S.W.2d 952 (1979) (upholding the offense of attempted felony-murder in that jurisdiction). The courts in these jurisdictions have concluded t......
  • State v. Sanders
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 9 Abril 2019
    ...Arkansas and the Supreme Court of Arkansas did so without any analysis or thoughtful discussion of the issue. See White v. State , 266 Ark. 499, 585 S.W.2d 952, 953-54 (1979).11 See Kimbrough , 924 S.W.2d at 891-92 (providing that "[c]onsidering that the legislature has already enacted spec......
  • Bruce v. State
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • 28 Noviembre 1989
    ...a contrary result is Amlotte v. State, 456 So.2d 448 (Fla.1984) (attempted felony murder is a valid crime). See also White v. State, 266 Ark. 499, 585 S.W.2d 952, 954 (1979) (recognizing the existence of attempted felony murder under that state's statutory definition of attempt, but noting ......
  • State v. Lea
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 17 Junio 1997
    ...171 (1983); State v. Bell, 785 P.2d 390 (Utah 1989); State v. Carter, 44 Wis.2d 151, 170 N.W.2d 681 (1969). But see White v. State, 266 Ark. 499, 585 S.W.2d 952 (1979) (upholding the offense of attempted felony-murder in that jurisdiction). Id. In sum, the courts of at least fifteen jurisdi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
  • § 27.05 Mens Rea of Criminal Attempts
    • United States
    • Carolina Academic Press Understanding Criminal Law (CAP) 2022 Title Chapter 27 Attempt
    • Invalid date
    ...of this topic, see Cahill, Note 62, supra.[74] See § 31.06, infra.[75] Arkansas and Florida are the exceptions. White v. State, 585 S.W.2d 952 (Ark. 1979); Fla. Stat. § 782.051.[76] Among the states that have ruled that attempted felony-murder is not a cognizable offense are People v. Meyer......
  • § 27.05 MENS REA OF CRIMINAL ATTEMPTS
    • United States
    • Carolina Academic Press Understanding Criminal Law (CAP) 2018 Title Chapter 27 Attempt
    • Invalid date
    ...of this topic, see Cahill, Note 62, supra.[74] . See § 31.06, infra.[75] . Arkansas and Florida are the exceptions. White v. State, 585 S.W.2d 952 (Ark. 1979); Fla. Stat. § 782.051.[76] . Among the states that have ruled that attempted felony-murder is not a cognizable offense are People v.......
  • TABLE OF CASES
    • United States
    • Carolina Academic Press Understanding Criminal Law (CAP) 2018 Title Table of Cases
    • Invalid date
    ...1970), 476 Wheelock, State v., 609 A.2d 972 (Vt. 1992), 227 White v. State, 185 N.E. 64 (Ohio Ct. App. 1933), 151, 152 White v. State, 585 S.W.2d 952 (Ark. 1979), 368, 369 White, State v., 270 P.2d 727 (N.M. 1954), 330 Whitmore v. State, 298 N.W. 194 (Wis. 1941), 539 Whitner v. State, 492 S......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT