Walker v. State (Majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 742 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II CR-13-482 No. Opinion Delivered December 11, 2013 ALFRED JAMES WALKER APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, APPELLANT FOURTH DIVISION [NO. CR-12-2081] V. STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE HERBERT WRIGHT, JUDGE APPELLEE AFFIRMED RHONDA K. WOOD, Judge Appellant Alfred James Walker was convicted of theft of property greater than $1,000 but less than $5,000, a Class D felony. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction. His argument is not preserved for appeal, and we affirm. Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 33.1 requires a defendant to renew a motion for directed verdict or dismissal at the close of the case in order to preserve for review any question pertaining to the sufficiency of the evidence. To preserve for appeal the issue of the sufficiency of the evidence in a criminal case, the appellant must move for a directed verdict both at the close of the State s case and at the close of the whole case. King v. State, 338 Ark. 591, 999 S.W.2d 183 (1999). Here, Walker moved to dismiss the charges against him at the close of the State s evidence. However, at the close of all Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 742 evidence, he failed to renew his motion. Following the strict standard set out in Rule 33.1(c), Walker failed to preserve for appellate review the issue of sufficiency of the evidence. Affirmed. GLOVER and HIXSON, JJ., agree. William R. Simpson, Jr., Public Defender, and Brandy Turner, Deputy Public Defender, by: Margaret Egan, Deputy Public Defender, for appellant. Dustin McDaniel, Att y Gen., by: Kathryn Henry, Ass t Att y Gen., and Nathan Aylesworth, Law Student Admitted to Practice Pursuant to Rule XV of the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar of the Supreme Court under the supervision of Darnisa Evans Johnson, Deputy Att y Gen., for appellee. 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.
