Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
KENDRICK L. REED v. STATE OF ARKANSAS
Date: 04-02-2022
Case Number: 2020 Ark. App. 520
Judge: BART F. VIRDEN
Court:
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
On appeal from The PULASKI
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
FOURTH DIVISION
Plaintiff's Attorney: Clint Miller, Deputy Public Defender
Defendant's Attorney:
Little Rock, AR - Best Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory
Little Rock, AR - Best Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800
Description:
Little Rock, AR - Criminal Defense lawyer represented defendant with challenging the sufficiency of the evidence of a residential burglary charge.
Reed was arrested on May 28, 2018, and charged with residential burglary, thirddegree battery, and second-degree terroristic threatening. He waived his right to a jury trial,
and the case proceeded to a bench trial. At the trial, Markaye Collins testified that on May
28, shortly after her boyfriend, LeBron Campbell, left her apartment, someone knocked on
her door. Thinking it was her boyfriend, she answered the door. Collins testified that Reed
and two other men explained that they were looking for Campbell and that they seemed
angry. Collins testified that Reed hit her in the face knocking her to the ground, and the
men entered her apartment. Reed threatened to hit Collins again if she did not tell him
where Campbell was, and after they searched her apartment and did not find Campbell,
they left.
2
Reed moved the court to dismiss the charges of residential burglary. In pertinent
part, Reed contended that
[f]or Count 1, we have a residential burglary. The, first, the State has to show that
there was unlawful, felonious entry into this house. I don't believe the State has met
its burden even though taking the evidence most light, favorable to them, the
testimony today, she's changed her story. She told the officers that she was leaving,
and they came into the apartment. In her statement she said they were knocking on
the door and then she let 'em in. On the second prong, purpose of committing [an
offense] therein, I think in the felony information says battery in the third degree.
The witness testified that they were there for the purpose of finding LeBron, not for
the purpose of committing that offense.
The court denied the motion and found Reed guilty of all charges. Reed timely filed
his notice of appeal.
On appeal, Reed argues for the first time that
[a]t most, Markaye Collins's testimony at trial proved that Appellant Reed punched
her in the face before he entered her residence. Given that Appellant Reed's thirddegree battery against Ms. Collins took place before he entered her residence, this
conduct could not serve as circumstantial proof that he had the specific intent to
commit third-degree battery against her again after he entered her apartment.
Appellant Reed committed third-degree battery against Ms. Collins once, before he
entered her residence, and did not commit a second third-degree battery against her
after he entered her residence. Because he committed third-degree battery against
Ms. Collins before he entered her residence, there was no factual basis that would
allow the fact-finder to reasonably infer that he intended to punch her in the face
after he entered her residence, unless he did so again after entering her residence. In effect,
Appellant Reed's conduct was no more a predicate third-degree battery for
residential burglary than his conduct would have been a predicate third-degree
battery for residential burglary had he punched [her] in the face in her front yard,
outside her residence.
(Third emphasis added.)
By contrast, in his motion to dismiss, Reed argued that Collins's statement to the
police differed from her trial testimony and that the State failed to prove that Reed entered
the home with the purpose of committing third-degree battery. Specifically, Reed did not
3
argue below that the State was required to prove that Reed committed a second battery
once he was inside Collins's apartment.
Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 33.1(b) (2019) provides that in a nonjury trial,
if a motion for dismissal is to be made, it shall be made at the close of the evidence and shall
state the specific grounds therefor. Rule 33.1(c) further provides that a motion for dismissal
based on insufficiency of the evidence must specify the respect in which the evidence is
deficient. In order to preserve a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence for appeal from
a bench trial, the issue must be articulated clearly and specifically to the circuit court in a
motion to dismiss so that the circuit court will have the opportunity to either grant the
motion or, if justice requires, allow the State to reopen its case and supply the missing proof.
Cox v. State, 2019 Ark. App. 192, 575 S.W.3d 134. The appellate courts do not address
arguments that are raised for the first time on appeal. Williams v. State, 2019 Ark. 129, 571
S.W.3d 921. Appellants are bound by the arguments raised in the circuit court and the scope
and nature of those arguments as presented to the circuit court. Id. Reed's argument on
appeal is different from his argument to the circuit court; accordingly, we affirm.
Outcome:
Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of KENDRICK L. REED v. STATE OF ARKANSAS?
The outcome was: Affirmed
Which court heard KENDRICK L. REED v. STATE OF ARKANSAS?
This case was heard in <center><h4><b> ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS </b>
<br>
<br>
<font color="green"><i>On appeal from The PULASKI
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
FOURTH DIVISION </i></font></center></h4>, AR. The presiding judge was BART F. VIRDEN.
Who were the attorneys in KENDRICK L. REED v. STATE OF ARKANSAS?
Plaintiff's attorney: Clint Miller, Deputy Public Defender. Defendant's attorney: Little Rock, AR - Best Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800.
When was KENDRICK L. REED v. STATE OF ARKANSAS decided?
This case was decided on April 2, 2022.
Little Rock, AR - Criminal Defense lawyer represented defendant with challenging the sufficiency of the evidence of a residential burglary charge.
Reed was arrested on May 28, 2018, and charged with residential burglary, thirddegree battery, and second-degree terroristic threatening. He waived his right to a jury trial,
and the case proceeded to a bench trial. At the trial, Markaye Collins testified that on May
28, shortly after her boyfriend, LeBron Campbell, left her apartment, someone knocked on
her door. Thinking it was her boyfriend, she answered the door. Collins testified that Reed
and two other men explained that they were looking for Campbell and that they seemed
angry. Collins testified that Reed hit her in the face knocking her to the ground, and the
men entered her apartment. Reed threatened to hit Collins again if she did not tell him
where Campbell was, and after they searched her apartment and did not find Campbell,
they left.
2
Reed moved the court to dismiss the charges of residential burglary. In pertinent
part, Reed contended that
[f]or Count 1, we have a residential burglary. The, first, the State has to show that
there was unlawful, felonious entry into this house. I don't believe the State has met
its burden even though taking the evidence most light, favorable to them, the
testimony today, she's changed her story. She told the officers that she was leaving,
and they came into the apartment. In her statement she said they were knocking on
the door and then she let 'em in. On the second prong, purpose of committing [an
offense] therein, I think in the felony information says battery in the third degree.
The witness testified that they were there for the purpose of finding LeBron, not for
the purpose of committing that offense.
The court denied the motion and found Reed guilty of all charges. Reed timely filed
his notice of appeal.
On appeal, Reed argues for the first time that
[a]t most, Markaye Collins's testimony at trial proved that Appellant Reed punched
her in the face before he entered her residence. Given that Appellant Reed's thirddegree battery against Ms. Collins took place before he entered her residence, this
conduct could not serve as circumstantial proof that he had the specific intent to
commit third-degree battery against her again after he entered her apartment.
Appellant Reed committed third-degree battery against Ms. Collins once, before he
entered her residence, and did not commit a second third-degree battery against her
after he entered her residence. Because he committed third-degree battery against
Ms. Collins before he entered her residence, there was no factual basis that would
allow the fact-finder to reasonably infer that he intended to punch her in the face
after he entered her residence, unless he did so again after entering her residence. In effect,
Appellant Reed's conduct was no more a predicate third-degree battery for
residential burglary than his conduct would have been a predicate third-degree
battery for residential burglary had he punched [her] in the face in her front yard,
outside her residence.
(Third emphasis added.)
By contrast, in his motion to dismiss, Reed argued that Collins's statement to the
police differed from her trial testimony and that the State failed to prove that Reed entered
the home with the purpose of committing third-degree battery. Specifically, Reed did not
3
argue below that the State was required to prove that Reed committed a second battery
once he was inside Collins's apartment.
Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 33.1(b) (2019) provides that in a nonjury trial,
if a motion for dismissal is to be made, it shall be made at the close of the evidence and shall
state the specific grounds therefor. Rule 33.1(c) further provides that a motion for dismissal
based on insufficiency of the evidence must specify the respect in which the evidence is
deficient. In order to preserve a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence for appeal from
a bench trial, the issue must be articulated clearly and specifically to the circuit court in a
motion to dismiss so that the circuit court will have the opportunity to either grant the
motion or, if justice requires, allow the State to reopen its case and supply the missing proof.
Cox v. State, 2019 Ark. App. 192, 575 S.W.3d 134. The appellate courts do not address
arguments that are raised for the first time on appeal. Williams v. State, 2019 Ark. 129, 571
S.W.3d 921. Appellants are bound by the arguments raised in the circuit court and the scope
and nature of those arguments as presented to the circuit court. Id. Reed's argument on
appeal is different from his argument to the circuit court; accordingly, we affirm.
Affirmed
About This Case
What was the outcome of KENDRICK L. REED v. STATE OF ARKANSAS?
The outcome was: Affirmed
Which court heard KENDRICK L. REED v. STATE OF ARKANSAS?
This case was heard in <center><h4><b> ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS </b> <br> <br> <font color="green"><i>On appeal from The PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH DIVISION </i></font></center></h4>, AR. The presiding judge was BART F. VIRDEN.
Who were the attorneys in KENDRICK L. REED v. STATE OF ARKANSAS?
Plaintiff's attorney: Clint Miller, Deputy Public Defender. Defendant's attorney: Little Rock, AR - Best Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World. Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement Counselor: MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public. MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800.
When was KENDRICK L. REED v. STATE OF ARKANSAS decided?
This case was decided on April 2, 2022.