A.P. v. State of Arkansas
This text of 2019 Ark. App. 373 (A.P. v. State of Arkansas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Cite as 2019 Ark. App. 373 Digitally signed by Elizabeth ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS Perry Date: 2022.07.25 11:03:05 DIVISION III -05'00' No. CR-19-85 Adobe Acrobat version: 2022.001.20169
Opinion Delivered: September 11, 2019
AP APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE LONOKE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT V. [NO. 43JV-18-206]
STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE BARBARA ELMORE, APPELLEE JUDGE AFFIRMED
MIKE MURPHY, Judge
AP appeals the November 29, 2018 order of the Lonoke County Circuit Court
adjudicating her delinquent for disorderly conduct. On appeal she argues that evidence
presented at trial was insufficient to support the adjudication. We affirm.
On February 14, 2018, AP was eating lunch at school. While in the cafeteria, AP
made statements to other students about wanting to fight SR. She also told SR she wanted
to fight and “made gestures” toward SR. Eventually SR walked over to where AP was
sitting in the cafeteria and hit AP on the head. Both AP and SR got in trouble at school,
and AP was charged in the juvenile court with one count of disorderly conduct in violation
of Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-71-207 (Repl. 2016). At a bench trial, AP was
adjudicated delinquent for disorderly conduct and placed on probation for five months. AP
timely appeals. On appeal, AP argues that the evidence presented at trial is insufficient to support
the disorderly-conduct charge. AP’s argument, however, is not preserved for appellate
review.
Challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence at a bench trial are made through a
motion to dismiss. Oliver v. State, 2016 Ark. App. 332, 498 S.W.3d 320. A motion to dismiss
must state with specificity the grounds on which the motion relies. Id.; see also Ark. R.
Crim. P. 33.1(b) (2018). Failure to raise an issue in a motion precludes this court from
considering it on appeal. See, e.g., Oliver, 2016 Ark. App. 332, at 5, 498 S.W.3d at 323. The
Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure, including Rule 33.1, apply to delinquency
proceedings under the Arkansas Juvenile Code. Jones v. State, 347 Ark. 409, 415–16, 64
S.W.3d 728, 732 (2002). Thus, failure to make a motion to dismiss at the close of all the
evidence in an adjudication hearing will constitute a waiver of any question pertaining to
the sufficiency of the evidence to support the adjudication. Ark. R. Crim. P. 33.1(c); id.
During the trial, AP never moved to dismiss the case on the basis of a lack of sufficient
evidence. Her counsel acknowledges this point but asks that we nonetheless consider the
argument preserved because AP’s case falls within an exception set forth in Wicks v. State,
270 Ark. 781, 606 S.W.2d 366 (1980).
In Wicks our supreme court enumerated four exceptions to the contemporaneous-
objection rule. However, the application of the exceptions listed in Wicks is limited to
specific constitutional and statutory-error arguments that are distinct from sufficiency-of-
the-evidence arguments. McDaniels v. State, 2012 Ark. App. 219, at 3–4.
2 Accordingly, the appellant’s sufficiency-of-the-evidence argument is not preserved
for our review.
Affirmed.
ABRAMSON and HIXSON, JJ., agree.
Robert M. “Robby” Golden, for appellant.
Leslie Rutledge, Att’y Gen., by: Michael L. Yarbrough, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2019 Ark. App. 373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ap-v-state-of-arkansas-arkctapp-2019.