Eddie J. Ashmore v. State of Arkansas

2024 Ark. App. 506
CourtCourt of Appeals of Arkansas
DecidedOctober 23, 2024
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 2024 Ark. App. 506 (Eddie J. Ashmore 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.

Bluebook
Eddie J. Ashmore v. State of Arkansas, 2024 Ark. App. 506 (Ark. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

Cite as 2024 Ark. App. 506 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CR-24-23

Opinion Delivered October 23, 2024 EDDIE J. ASHMORE APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE WASHINGTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 72CR-20-2574] V. HONORABLE MARK LINDSAY, STATE OF ARKANSAS JUDGE APPELLEE AFFIRMED

RITA W. GRUBER, Judge

Eddie Ashmore was charged with second-degree domestic battering, first-degree

false imprisonment, and first-degree terroristic threatening for events that occurred during

several days of Thanksgiving week in 2020. He was tried before a jury and convicted of all

charges. The circuit court sentenced him to six years’ imprisonment for the domestic

battering, three years’ imprisonment for the false imprisonment, and three years’

imprisonment for the terroristic threatening—the sentences to run consecutively. The

victim of these crimes was his wife, Dorothy Ashmore.1

Eddie appeals his convictions and sentences from the court’s September 22, 2023

sentencing order. He contends that (1) the evidence was not sufficient to support his

convictions and (2) the circuit court erred in sentencing him to consecutive terms of

1 Ms. Ashmore testified at trial that the parties divorced in October 2021. imprisonment. We affirm.

I. Sufficiency of the Evidence

The State’s case-in-chief included testimony by officers of the Fayetteville Police

Department, Dorothy Ashmore, and the Ashmores’ adult daughter Laura, along with

photos and documentation of Dorothy’s physical wounds. Eddie’s counsel moved for a

directed verdict on all counts at the conclusion of the State’s case. The motion was denied.

Eddie then testified in his defense, and the defense rested. His counsel renewed his

directed-verdict motion. Again, the court denied the motion.

A motion for a directed verdict is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence.

Hughes v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 378, at 6, 467 S.W.3d 170, 174. When reviewing the

sufficiency of the evidence, we look at the evidence in the light most favorable to the State.

Id. at 175. The test for determining the sufficiency of the evidence is whether the verdict

is supported by substantial evidence, direct or circumstantial. Id. Evidence is substantial

when it is forceful enough to compel a conclusion and goes beyond mere speculation or

conjecture. Id.

Under these standards, we address the sufficiency of the evidence. Officers Jon

Haden and Christian Hurd testified that they responded to a disturbance-and-mental-

distress call at the Ashmores’ home the morning of November 28, 2020, the Saturday after

Thanksgiving. Video footage from each officer’s body camera was played for the jury. The

officers encountered Eddie outside the home; he was belligerent and antagonistic, and

told them that Dorothy was delusional. Her shoes lay on the grass in the front yard, and

2 she agreed that she was in a delusional state. The officers noted that Dorothy’s left ring

finger had blood on it and was “extremely blue-bruised,” she had a bruised elbow and

“blood on her lips and the area above her nose, and her hairline on her forehead was

starting to bruise” and was slightly swollen. Dorothy was in distress and did not

communicate well with the officers. She denied that Eddie had caused her injuries, saying

that she was very sleepy and “probably did it to myself just because.” She allowed the

officers to come inside with her. They called for an ambulance, but she refused medical

help. With nothing more they could do, the officers left Eddie and Dorothy at home and

returned to their duties.

Officer Haydon spoke with Detective Scott O’Dell at the police department but

went to the hospital after receiving a phone call that Dorothy was there. Laura had taken

her mother to the hospital and was with her when Officer Haydon arrived. Dorothy spoke

openly to him about what had happened, contradicting what she had told officers earlier—

that she had caused her own injuries.

Detective O’Dell phoned Eddie the following Monday, November 30. Eddie said

in their recorded conversation that Dorothy and he had been together for the four

previous days and that she was delusional after having had COVID. Eddie said Dorothy

told him she had participated in orgies in the past; had become pregnant by a friend of

his; and had two abortions and fifty to sixty “infidelities,” including with some females,

during the Ashmores’ previous ten years of marriage. He said she had held him hostage

three days at Thanksgiving and physically blocked him from leaving. He said her bruises

3 and broken bones were from her falling or beating her head on the wall like her mother

did, explaining that the two women had “the same mental disorder.”

At trial, Dorothy testified that the following events occurred. The day before

Thanksgiving, she and Eddie sat in a smoking area of their garage, and he began asking

questions about people she had been intimate with: “He was accusing me of different

people that I had been with, and . . . accusing me of being in orgies.” He would set a five-

minute timer on his phone; at five minutes he would “bing” a long paperclip against a

metal ashtray and say, “Time’s up, time’s up. You didn’t answer fast enough.” Then he

would go on to another form of question. This continued all day and all night. Laura was

there at one point: she set a timer on her phone for five minutes and asked Dorothy about

Dorothy’s mother—who had died the year before. When Laura said she was leaving,

Dorothy tried to keep her there because Eddie had stopped questioning her. Dorothy

stood in the front doorway and tried to block Laura from going, but Laura eventually left.

Eddie and Dorothy went into the living room to watch movies, then back to the garage

where the questioning continued, then back to the den. Dorothy did not remember getting

any sleep that night. The next morning, she and Eddie were back in the garage. She was

smoking cigarettes and having coffee when he started the questioning again, asking about

her past abortions and saying that he was not her husband. She testified that it was very

confusing and very disorienting, and she became nervous and scared.

Dorothy was up again all through Thanksgiving night, watching movies in the den,

being questioned by Eddie in the garage, and watching more movies. Around 2:30 a.m.,

4 he took her phone and resumed questioning her. He told her, “I’m going to take a hit off

the bong, and by the time I’m done with inhaling, and when I exhale, you better have

[your] answer ready.” He asked about her “affairs” with fifty people and about orgies.

Dorothy testified that “he asks a question, and he hits his bong, and he sits there, and then

he breathes out, and he takes that metal paperclip that’s in that metal ashtray, and he

clinks it. And he says, ‘Times up.’” He became increasingly aggressive in the questioning:

his voice became louder, he gritted his teeth, and he continued questioning. He asked who

Laura’s dad was and “who was the person at the orgy.” She told him there was no orgy,

but he wanted names. He gave her pen and paper to write their names. He screamed out

the name of a former employee from their business in a previous city.

At this point, Dorothy denied being with the man. There was no name to write, so

she stood up. Eddie then struck her jaw with his closed fist “full impact,” and she “went

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jeffery D. Parnell v. State of Arkansas
2025 Ark. App. 417 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2025)
Minor Child v. State of Arkansas
2025 Ark. App. 76 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2025)
John Malone v. State of Arkansas
2025 Ark. App. 84 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2025)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2024 Ark. App. 506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eddie-j-ashmore-v-state-of-arkansas-arkctapp-2024.