Willie Taylor, Jr. v. State of Arkansas

2024 Ark. App. 554, 700 S.W.3d 240

• Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas
• Decided: November 6, 2024
• Status: Published

Opinion

Cite as 2024 Ark. App. 555 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CR-24-62

WILLIE TAYLOR, JR. APPELLANT Opinion Delivered November 6, 2024

V. APPEAL FROM THE DREW COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, [NO. 22CR-21-231]

STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE ROBERT BYNUM APPELLEE GIBSON, JR., JUDGE

AFFIRMED

MIKE MURPHY, Judge Appellant Willie Taylor, Jr., was convicted of the first-degree murder of Kelly

Coleman, and the jury sentenced him to serve a term of forty-five years in prison. On appeal,

Taylor argues the State failed to negate his justification defense. The State contends that

Taylor’s argument is not preserved for appellate review. Because we agree with the State that

his arguments are not preserved for our review, we affirm without reaching the merits of

Taylor’s argument.

Evidence at trial established that on the afternoon of August 21, 2021, Taylor and

Coleman—a man unknown to Taylor—had a verbal altercation in front of Taylor’s house.

Keshaun Howell testified that he intended to visit with Taylor, and as he pulled up to

Taylor’s house, Coleman drove up in a truck, got out, and walked up to where Taylor was standing outside of the house. Renee Johnson, Taylor’s neighbor and an acquaintance of

Coleman, was passing by at this time. She intervened, and Coleman ultimately drove away.

Taylor then got into Howell’s car parked in Taylor’s driveaway and had a conversation with

him. Soon after, as Taylor and Howell were still talking, Coleman pulled up behind them in

the car. Coleman rolled his window down and said, “You thought this was over. It ain’t over

until I say it’s over.” According to Howell, Taylor then got out of the car and walked to the

rear of it, where he took out his pistol and placed it on the trunk of the car. Johnson again

ran over to prevent Coleman from interacting with Taylor, but Coleman broke free and

attacked Taylor. Coleman punched Taylor’s neck forcefully twice. Taylor then grabbed his

gun and fatally shot Coleman.

In moving for directed verdict at the conclusion of the State’s evidence, Taylor argued

that the State had not met its burden of proof that Taylor, with the purpose to kill Coleman,

did in fact kill Coleman. The circuit court denied Taylor’s motion. In renewing his motion

for directed verdict, Taylor argued his “purpose was not to kill [Coleman], but to defend

him—get him off of him so that’s what happened. It wasn’t like he aimed at him.” The court

again denied that motion. Following the guilty verdict and sentencing, Taylor appealed.

A motion for directed verdict is treated as a challenge to the sufficiency of the

evidence. Kinsey v. State, 2016 Ark. 393, 503 S.W.3d 772. In reviewing a challenge to the

sufficiency of the evidence, we assess the evidence in the light most favorable to the State

and consider only the evidence that supports the verdict. Id. This court will affirm a judgment

of conviction if substantial evidence exists to support it. Id. Substantial evidence is evidence

2 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.

In order to preserve a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence in a jury trial, a

criminal defendant must move for directed verdict at the close of the evidence offered by the

prosecution and at the close of all the evidence. Ark. R. Crim. P. 33.1(a). A motion for

directed verdict shall state the specific grounds therefor. Maxwell v. State, 373 Ark. 553, 559,

285 S.W.3d 195, 200 (2008). Without a circuit court ruling on a specific motion, there is

nothing for this court to review. Id. Failure to abide by these procedural rules renders any

question of the sufficiency of the evidence waived on appeal. Ark. R. Crim. P. 33.1(c). An

appellant must make a specific motion for a directed verdict that advises the circuit court of

the exact element of the crime that the State has failed to prove. Johnson v. State, 2021 Ark.

App. 207. Rule 33.1 is strictly construed. Id.

On appeal, Taylor argues that the State failed to introduce substantial evidence that

negated his theory of self-defense. This argument is not preserved for our review because

Taylor focuses solely on his justification defense, which was not specifically argued in his

motions for directed verdict.

In Kinsey, our supreme court held that the appellant’s argument that the State failed

to negate his justification defense was not preserved for review because he made only a

general motion to the circuit court and did not identify specifically how the State’s proof was

insufficient to meet its burden. 2016 Ark. 393, 503 S.W.3d 772. The court noted that the

specific elements would include “whether the State failed to show that [the appellant] lacked

3 a reasonable belief that the victims were about to use deadly force; whether the State failed

to demonstrate that [the appellant] could not have retreated safely; or whether the State

failed to demonstrate that the victims were not committing, or were about to commit, a

felony involving force or violence.” Id. at 9, 503 S.W.3d at 778; see also Woods v. State, 2018

Ark. App. 256, at 4, 548 S.W.3d 832, 835 (holding that the appellant failed to preserve her

sufficiency argument on her justification defense when she made a general motion that she

was “defending her sons”).

Likewise, in the present appeal, there was no focused argument regarding any specific

element that the State failed to disprove, as outlined in the Kinsey appeal. Our appellate

courts have been steadfast in holding that we will not address the merits of an appellant’s

insufficiency argument when the directed-verdict motion is not specific. Woods v. State, 2018

Ark. App. 256, at 5, 548 S.W.3d 832, 835.

Affirmed.

GRUBER and BARRETT, JJ., agree.

James Law Firm, by: William O. “Bill” James, Jr., and Drew Curtis, for appellant.

Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Kent G. Holt, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.