Tillman v. State

217 S.W.3d 773, 364 Ark. 143
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided November 17, 2005·No. CR 04-1375·Published·Cited by 44 cases

Opinion

Jim Hannah, Chief Justice.

Appellant, Willie Tillman, Jr., appeals the judgment of the Lonoke County Circuit Court convicting him of first-degree murder and sentencing him to a term of life imprisonment. His sole point on appeal is that the circuit court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict because the State’s evidence is not sufficient to sustain his conviction.'We disagree and affirm. Our jurisdiction of this case is pursuant to Ark. Sup. Ct. R. l-2(a)(2), as this is a criminal appeal in which life imprisonment has been imposed.

The victim in this case, Deon Youngblood, was shot and killed on August 29, 2002, while riding in a vehicle with Tillman and Shamane Hendricks. 1 According to Hendricks, he and Tillman believed that Youngblood had been involved in a robbery of cocaine from them in August 2002. Subsequently, Tillman responded to a classified advertisement and purchased a gun. Hendricks testified that Tillman purchased the gun for protection because he did not feel safe after the two were robbed of their cocaine. Hendricks said that about two weeks after the robbery, Tillman said that he was going to kill Youngblood the next time he saw him.

Soon thereafter, Youngblood went for a ride in Tillman’s car with Tillman and Hendricks. At some point during the ride, Youngblood was fatally wounded. Both Tillman and Hendricks testified at trial, and both admitted to firing shots at Youngblood. However, Tillman moved for directed verdict, arguing that the State failed to present substantial evidence that any of the bullets he fired caused the victim’s death. The circuit court denied the motion and, from that ruling, Tillman brings this appeal.

Standard of Review

We treat a motion for directed verdict as a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. Coggin v. State, 356 Ark. 424, 156 S.W.3d 712 (2004). This court has repeatedly held that in reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we view the evidence in a light most favorable to the State and consider only the evidence that supports the verdict. Stone v. State, 348 Ark. 661, 74 S.W.3d 591 (2002). We affirm a conviction if substantial evidence exists to support it. Id. Substantial evidence is that which is of sufficient force and character that it will, with reasonable certainty, compel a conclusion one way or the other, without resorting to speculation or conjecture. Id.

Circumstantial evidence may provide a basis to support a conviction, but it must be consistent with the defendant’s guilt and inconsistent with any other reasonable conclusion. Edmond v. State, 351 Ark. 495, 95 S.W.3d 789 (2003). Whether the evidence excludes every other hypothesis is left to the jury to decide. Carmichael v. State, 340 Ark. 598, 12 S.W.3d 225 (2000). The credibility of witnesses is an issue for the jury and not the court. Burley v. State, 348 Ark. 422, 73 S.W.3d 600 (2002). The trier of fact is free to believe all or part of any witness’s testimony and may resolve questions of conflicting testimony and inconsistent evidence. Id.

Sufficiency of the Evidence

Tillman challenges the sufficiency of the evidence on the basis that there was insufficient corroboration of accomplice testimony to support his conviction. However, the record reveals that Tillman did not raise this issue in his directed-verdict motion. At the close of the State’s case-in-chief, Tillman made the following motion:

At this time, the defendant would move for a directed verdict, in that, the State has failed to prove each and every element of the charged offense, that Mr. Willie Tillman, Jr., knowingly caused the death of. . . Deon Youngblood. The evidence presented by the state crime lab, the — Dr. Sturner, he could not testify as to the order of the bullets fired, and thereby, not indicating which bullet caused the death of Deon Youngblood. There is testimony that . . . Shamane Hendricks did fire into the body of Deon Young-blood. He could not say — he said it appeared that he shot in the side. There was evidence that one of the bullets through the side penetrated vital organs, and that bullet could have caused the death of Deon Y oungblood. Therefore, the State cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Willie Tillman caused the death of Deon Youngblood.

Tillman renewed the motion at the conclusion of his case-in-chief and, again, at the conclusion of the State’s rebuttal. The circuit court denied the motion in all three instances. Rule 33.1(a) of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that “[a] motion for directed verdict shall state the specific grounds therefor.” The requirement that a defendant make a specific directed-verdict motion extends to any challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence corroborating an accomplice’s testimony, and the failure to challenge the sufficiency of accomplice-corroboration evidence in a directed-verdict motion at trial precludes appellate review on that ground. Hutts v. State, 342 Ark. 278, 28 S.W.3d 265 (2000). Parties are bound by the scope and nature of the objections and arguments made at trial. Tester v. State, 342 Ark. 549, 30 S.W.3d 99 (2000). Where an appellant argues on appeal grounds for a directed verdict in addition to the grounds he raised below, the appellate court limits its review to those grounds that were presented to the trial court. Ayers v. State, 334 Ark. 258, 975 S.W.2d 88 (1998). This is true even in cases where a sentence of life imprisonment is imposed, as it is this court’s duty, pursuant to Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(h), to examine the record for error on objections decided adversely to the appellant, not to address arguments that might have been made. Tester, supra (citing Childress v. State, 322 Ark. 127, 907 S.W.2d 718 (1995)). In the instant case, because counsel for Tillman did not specifically challenge the State’s evidence corroborating Hendricks’s testimony in his directed-verdict motion, his argument is barred. See id.

Tillman further asserts that the circumstantial, forensic evidence relating to the gunshot wounds and bullet holes in his car does not amount to substantial evidence that would allow a jury to conclude that he could have caused the death of Youngblood. Arkansas Code Annotated § 5-10-102 (Repl. 1997) provides, in relevant part, that a person commits murder in the first degree if:

(1) Acting alone or with one (1) 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

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

Tillman v. State, 217 S.W.3d 773, 364 Ark. 143 (Ark. 2005).

217 S.W.3d 773 (Tillman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mandy Ann Cobb v. State of Arkansas
2026 Ark. App. 109 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2026)
Tyler McKisick v. State of Arkansas
2022 Ark. App. 426 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2022)
Rabion v. State
2017 Ark. App. 538 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2017)
Hicks v. State
2017 Ark. 262 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2017)
Kinsey v. State
2016 Ark. 393 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2016)
Sylvester v. State
2016 Ark. 136 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2016)
Fennell v. State
2016 Ark. App. 142 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2016)
Conte v. State
2015 Ark. 220 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2015)
Thomas v. State
2015 Ark. App. 88 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2015)
Moody v. State
2014 Ark. App. 538 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2014)
Hooks v. State
2013 Ark. App. 728 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2013)
Phengthavy v. State
2013 Ark. App. 732 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2013)
Shatwell v. State
2013 Ark. App. 568 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2013)
Plessy v. State
388 S.W.3d 509 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2012)
Holt v. State
2011 Ark. 391 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2011)
Draper v. State
378 S.W.3d 191 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2010)
Johnson v. State
378 S.W.3d 152 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2010)
Smith v. State
2010 Ark. 75 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2010)
Banks v. State
2009 Ark. 483 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2009)
Williams v. State
289 S.W.3d 97 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2008)