Kendal v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Kendal v. State

729 S.W.2d 1, 292 Ark. 173, 1987 Ark. LEXIS 2078

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedMay 11, 1987

DocketCR 86-222

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 729 S.W.2d 1 (Kendal v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kendal v. State, 729 S.W.2d 1, 292 Ark. 173, 1987 Ark. LEXIS 2078 (Ark. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Robert H. Dudley, Justice.

A jury found the appellant guilty of burglary, rape, and aggravated robbery. The appellant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdicts. We affirm the convictions.

The victim testified that late one night while watching television she fell asleep on a couch in her home. She was awakened by an intruder who held a knife at her throat. The intruder never allowed her to see his face. He raped her, took her car keys, money, and handgun. Police officers testified that the appellant had the victim’s handgun in his possession when he was arrested. The appellant later confessed to the crime. Police officers testified that the confession was freely and voluntarily given.

Appellant argues that the victim failed to identify him as the assailant and, therefore, the proof was insufficient. There was substantial evidence even though the victim could not positively identify the appellant. The confession coupled with the proof by the victim that the crimes were actually committed was sufficient to sustain the conviction. McQueen v. State, 283 Ark. 232, 675 S.W.2d 358 (1984). Appellant next contends that the evidence was insufficient because his confession lacked credibility. It was for the trier of fact to resolve questions of credibility. Abdullah v. State, 281 Ark. 239, 663 S.W.2d 166 (1984). Here, there was substantial evidence from which the jury could find that the confession was freely, voluntarily, and truthfully given.

Affirmed.

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

Robert H. Dudley, Justice.

A jury found the appellant guilty of burglary, rape, and aggravated robbery. The appellant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdicts. We affirm the convictions.

The victim testified that late one night while watching television she fell asleep on a couch in her home. She was awakened by an intruder who held a knife at her throat. The intruder never allowed her to see his face. He raped her, took her car keys, money, and handgun. Police officers testified that the appellant had the victim’s handgun in his possession when he was arrested. The appellant later confessed to the crime. Police officers testified that the confession was freely and voluntarily given.

Appellant argues that the victim failed to identify him as the assailant and, therefore, the proof was insufficient. There was substantial evidence even though the victim could not positively identify the appellant. The confession coupled with the proof by the victim that the crimes were actually committed was sufficient to sustain the conviction. McQueen v. State, 283 Ark. 232, 675 S.W.2d 358 (1984). Appellant next contends that the evidence was insufficient because his confession lacked credibility. It was for the trier of fact to resolve questions of credibility. Abdullah v. State, 281 Ark. 239, 663 S.W.2d 166 (1984). Here, there was substantial evidence from which the jury could find that the confession was freely, voluntarily, and truthfully given.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

729 S.W.2d 1, 292 Ark. 173, 1987 Ark. LEXIS 2078, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kendal-v-state-ark-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack