Title: Petty v. State

State: arkansas

Issuer: Arkansas Supreme Court

Document:

434 S.W.2d 602 (1968) Charles William PETTY, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. No. 5374. Supreme Court of Arkansas. December 9, 1968. *603 Tiner & Henry, Harrisburg, for appellant. Joe Purcell, Atty. Gen., Don Langston, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, for appellee. JONES, Justice. The appellant, Charles Petty, was tried before a jury and convicted of the crimes of burglary and grand larceny in the Poinsett County Circuit Court. He was sentenced to the state penitentiary for terms of fifteen years on each charge, the terms to run consecutively with minimum time to be served fixed by the court at ten years. Upon appeal to this court the appellant relies on the following three points for reversal: As to appellant's first point, the remarks to which he objects are contained in an exchange between the attorneys and the court as follows: We find no error in the trial court's denial of appellant's motion. This point was decided contrary to appellant's contention in Bethel and Wallace v. State, 180 Ark. 290, 21 S.W.2d 176, where this court said: As to his second point, appellant objects to the trial court's action in submitting to the jury the following instruction: Appellant specifically objects to this instruction on the basis that the instruction singles out and calls the jury's attention to particular evidence; that it is an instruction on the weight of the evidence, and therefore an invasion on the province of the jury. This court has also held contrary to appellant's contention on this point. In McDonald v. State, 165 Ark. 411, 264 S.W. 961, the appellant sought reversal of his conviction for the crime of stealing cattle. One of his assignments of error was that the court erred in giving the very same instruction as the one objected to in the case at bar. McDonald insisted in that case that the instruction was improper as being an instruction on the weight of the evidence, and in approving the instruction, this court said: See also Johnson v. State, 190 Ark. 979, 82 S.W.2d 521. Appellant's third point is without merit. No objection was made to the entry of the judgment or the penitentiary commitment thereon nor was this point presented to the trial court in a motion for a new trial. The rule is well settled that "no issue can be raised in this court which was not raised in the trial court * * *." Gulley v. Budd, 209 Ark. 23, 189 S.W.2d 385. Affirmed. FOGLEMAN, J., disqualified and not participating.