Title: Pike v. State

State: arkansas

Issuer: Arkansas Supreme Court

Document:

Billy PIKE v. STATE of Arkansas

CR 95-949                                          ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
               Opinion delivered January 16, 1996


1.   Appeal & error -- parties cannot change the grounds for an
     objection on appeal -- arguments not raised at trial not
     reached on appeal. -- It is well-settled that parties cannot
     change the grounds for an objection on appeal, but are bound
     by the scope and nature of the objections and arguments
     presented at trial; this is true even in cases where the
     sentence is life without parole, as the reviewing court's duty
     is only to examine the record for error on objections decided
     adversely to the appellant, not to address arguments that
     might have been made; where appellant's motions for directed
     verdict did not mention the other man's name that appellant
     said could have committed the murder, much less an argument
     that the State's proof failed to exclude the reasonable
     hypothesis that this other man killed the victim, nor did
     appellant present the argument that the certified docket sheet
     admitted into evidence proved that the State's witness was in
     custody at the time she claimed to have witnessed the murder,
     those points were not considered on appeal.

2.   Evidence -- challenge to the sufficiency of -- factors on
     review. -- In a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence,
     the court reviews the evidence in the light most favorable to
     the State and sustains the judgment of conviction if there is
     substantial evidence to support it; evidence is substantial if
     it is of sufficient force and character to compel reasonable
     minds to reach a conclusion and pass beyond suspicion and 
     conjecture; in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, the
     court need only consider evidence in support of the
     conviction; circumstantial evidence may constitute substantial
     evidence when every other reasonable hypothesis consistent
     with innocence is excluded; whether a reasonable hypothesis
     exists is for the trier of fact to resolve.

3.   Witnesses -- credibility of determined by the jury, not the
     appellate court. -- The appellate court does not decide
     whether the State's witnesses were credible; the jury has the
     right to believe all or any part of a witness' testimony. 

4.   Evidence -- jury chose to believe eyewitness -- sufficient
     evidence found that appellant committed the murder. -- Where
     the jury believed the eyewitness's account and another man's
     denial that he was involved in the shooting over appellant's
     theory of the case, the jury was able to exclude every other
     reasonable hypothesis consistent with appellant's innocence,
     and the eyewitness's testimony matched the medical testimony
     and the autopsy results and she confirmed that the clothes the
     victim was wearing when her body was discovered were the same
     as those she was wearing at the time of the shooting, the
     State presented sufficient evidence that appellant committed
     the murder.  


     Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Fourth Division; John
Langston, Judge; affirmed.
     William R. Simpson, Jr., Public Defender, by:  C. Joseph
Cordi, Jr., Deputy Public Defender, for appellant.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  David R. Raupp, Asst. Att'y
Gen., for appellee.

     Bradley D. Jesson, Chief Justice.
01/16/96







BILLY PIKE,
                    APPELLANT,

V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS,
                    APPELLEE,





CR95-949


APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY
CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH DIVISION
(CR94-2029)


HONORABLE JOHN LANGSTON
CIRCUIT JUDGE




AFFIRMED.




                Bradley D. Jesson, Chief Justice

     The appellant, Billy Pike, was convicted of the capital murder
of Sunday Stanfield and sentenced to life imprisonment without
parole.  His sole point on appeal is a challenge to the sufficiency
of the evidence.  We affirm. 
     On appeal, Pike raises specific points in support of his
position that the State's evidence was insufficient to convict him
of the capital murder charge.  He argues that the State's evidence
failed to exclude the substantial possibility that another man,
Bobby Chapple, killed the victim.  He also contends that a
certified docket sheet admitted into evidence proved that Michelle
Basey, the State's eyewitness, was in custody at the time she
claimed to have witnessed the murder.  Finally, he maintains that
there was insufficient evidence presented that he killed the
victim.  In reviewing the motions for directed verdict that Pike
made below, we conclude that only the last of these specific points
was preserved for our review.  At the close of the State's case,
counsel for Pike stated as follows:
     We'll move for a directed verdict.  Notwithstanding the
     credibility of some of the State's witnesses, Your Honor,
     I don't believe the State has shown sufficient evidence
     to show any kind of premeditated or deliberated purpose
     on the part of [Pike].  I guess, taking Miss Basey's
     testimony in the best light, at the very most we have
     from Miss Basey that she was in the basement with one
     shot, one shot that she testified to.  She did not see
     Sunday Stanfield fall or have impact from, but she was
     standing right up in front of Billy Pike.  And that was
     the only shot that she saw fired.  She testified that she
     could not even tell us that it had hit its target, and
     then that she left that basement, and she heard one more
     shot.  Other than that, we don't have anything causally
     connecting any incident or anything that Billy Pike did
     here.  At the very most we got one shot that the State's
     best witness cannot say had any impact at all.  So we
     don't even know if he shot her from what the State's
     presented today or presented in their case in chief.

     (Following the deputy prosecutor's response, counsel for
     Pike continued as follows:

     Your Honor, taking the State's case in its best light, I
     only recall hearing one shot after she left that
     basement.  State says well, that obviously they had a
     third shot.  They're speculating at best in regards to
     what had happened.  The testimony of Miss Basey was Miss
     Stanfield was standing straight up, looking at him when
     he shot her in the head.  There's no consistency with
     that testimony, and the testimony of the medical examiner
     was that she was shot two times behind the left ear. 
     That is absolutely inconsistent with that testimony at
     all.  She testified she didn't know what happened after
     she left that basement, and none of us know what happened
     after she left that basement.  What the State has
     presented is that they've got a body in a basement. 
     They've got what they think is the killer down there. 
     They have him maybe firing a gun at the person, but not
     in the right direction that the medical testimony states,
     and that's it.  And they want this Court to take all of
     that, and swallow it and say well, then, he must have
     been, only fired three times at her.  And taking it, the
     inconsistencies in that testimony, it must have been four
     times, because the first one he shot when she was
     standing straight up, and he couldn't have physically
     have done what the medical examiner says happened, strike
     her two times behind the left ear. 

At the close of all the evidence, Pike renewed his motion as
follows:
     I don't believe the State has shown any premeditated or
     deliberated purpose.  Here at best, taking the testimony,
     what we would believe at this point, would be an
     incredible not a credible witness, that being the
     testimony of Miss Basey based upon the evidence, both in
     the State's case and in the Defense's case.  Taking that
     evidence in its best light, Miss Basey said that she saw
     one shot,  That Miss Stanfield was standing straight up,
     looking at Mr. Pike at the time a shot was fired.  The
     testimony of the medical examiner was clearly that the
     weapon, the bullets hit her in the back of the head, and
     that Miss Basey left out after one shot had been fired. 
     And her testimony was she heard one more shot.  She
     doesn't know anything about if it was at anybody or not
     at anybody, but that there is insufficient evidence to
     show that there's any evidence to show that Mr. Pike
     killed this woman with any nature, premeditated or
     anything.

     It is well-settled that parties cannot change the grounds for
an objection on appeal, but are bound by the scope and nature of
the objections and arguments presented at trial.  Stewart v. State,
320 Ark. 75,