Danny Ventress v. State of Arkansas

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

JOHN E. JENNINGS, JUDGE

DIVISION III

CACR 00-733

February 14, 2001

DANNY VENTRESS APPEAL FROM PULASKI COUNTY

APPELLANT CIRCUIT COURT

VS.

HONORABLE JOHN PLEGGE,

CIRCUIT JUDGE

STATE OF ARKANSAS

APPELLEE AFFIRMED

Danny Ventress was charged with residential burglary, battery in the first degree, and criminal mischief in the first degree. He was found not guilty of the first count, guilty of the second count, and guilty of a reduced charge on the third count, and was sentenced to a total of twenty years. Ventress argues on appeal that the evidence is insufficient to support a first-degree battery conviction because the victim did not suffer serious physical injury. We disagree and affirm his conviction.

Keisha Owens testified that she and appellant had broken up and were no longer living together when appellant knocked on her door claiming to be a friend. She stated that appellant was upset that she was seeing another man. Owens testified that appellant cornered her and hit her in the head with a brick so many times that she could not recall the number of times she had been hit. She said that she held her hand up to try to shield her head from the blows. She was taken to the hospital in an ambulance where she received eight staples in her head and fifteen to twenty stitches in her hand. She also had a cracked bone in her wrist for which she wore an arm sling. She stated that part of her hand had still not healed but that, where it had healed, it had left a scar.

When we review a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we will affirm the conviction if there is substantial evidence to support it, when viewed in the light most favorable to the State. Freeman v. State, 331 Ark. 130, 959 S.W.2d 400 (1998). Substantial evidence is that which is of sufficient force and character to compel with reasonable certainty a conclusion without resort to speculation or conjecture. Knight v. State, 51 Ark. App. 60, 908 S.W.2d 664 (1995).

Arkansas Code Annotated § 5-13-201(a)(1) (Repl. 1997) provides that a person commits battery in the first degree if, with the purpose of causing serious physical injury to another person, he causes serious physical injury to any person by means of a deadly weapon. "Serious physical injury" has been defined as physicalinjury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes protracted disfigurement, protracted impairment of health, or loss or protracted impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-1-102(19)(Supp. 1999).

Appellant's argument is based, in part, on the absence of testimony as to the permanency of her injuries, the length of time she was in the hospital, the amount of work she missed, if any, and whether she had any protracted pain. Appellant recognizes that Bangs v. State, 338 Ark. 515, 998 S.W.2d 738 (1999), is factually similar but attempts to distinguish it by noting that in Bangs there was evidence that the surgeon characterized the victim's wounds as "serious physical injuries."

While it is true that there is no medical testimony in the case at bar, the nature of the attack was more severe, and the injuries were more substantial here than those in Bangs. Whether a person has suffered serious physical injury is ordinarily an issue for the trier of fact. See Bangs, supra; Purifoy v. State, 307 Ark. 482, 822 S.W.2d 374 (1991). Medical testimony as to severity is not required in every case. See Johnson v. State, 26 Ark. App. 286, 764 S.W.2d 621 (1989). The trier of fact is not required to set aside its common knowledge and may consider the evidence in light of its observations and experiences in the affairs of life. Id.

On the facts of this case, we are persuaded that reasonable minds could conclude that the victim sustained serious physical injury.

Affirmed.

Hart and Crabtree, JJ., agree.