Charles Owens v. State of Arkansas
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II
No.
CACR08-131
CHARLES OWENS,
Opinion Delivered 10
SEPTEMBER 2008
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE SALINE
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
[NO. CR-06-766-3]
V.
STATE OF ARKANSAS,
APPELLEE
THE HONORABLE GRISHAM A.
PHILLIPS, JUDGE
AFFIRMED
D. P. MARSHALL JR. , Judge
Charles “Red” Owens appeals his conviction for the second-degree sexual
assault of his step-daughter. Challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, Owens
contends that his step-daughter—the State’s primary witness—lacked credibility. She
testified that, on many occasions starting when she was fourteen, Owens touched her
“all over [her] body” and helped her masturbate. This testimony, if believed, satisfied
the relevant statutes. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-14-125(a)(4)(A)(iii) (Repl. 2006) (defining
second-degree sexual assault); Ark. Code Ann. § 5-14-101(9) (Repl. 2006) (defining
sexual contact).
Owens argues that his step-daughter’s testimony was full of
discrepancies. He also emphasizes that she had a motive to lie because she wanted to
live with her biological father, whose house rules were more lenient.
Owens’s challenges fail because the teenager’s credibility was for the jury to
judge. Barnes v. State, 258 Ark. 565, 574, 528 S.W.2d 370, 376 (1975). With few
exceptions, we must defer to the jury’s judgment. Ibid. Here, the jury believed the
step-daughter’s uncorroborated testimony, which was sufficient to support Owens’s
conviction. Cox v. State, 93 Ark. App. 419, 421, 220 S.W.3d 231, 233 (2005).
Because the substance of the step-daughter’s testimony was not inherently improbable,
physically impossible, or so clearly unbelievable that reasonable minds could not differ,
this court will not disturb the jury’s evaluation of the testimony. Barnes, 258 Ark. at
574, 528 S.W.2d at 376. Substantial evidence therefore supports Owens’s conviction.
Affirmed.
BIRD and GLOVER, JJ., agree.
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
