Bridges did not raise this argument before the trial court. As this court has repeatedly prohibited appellants from raising arguments for the first time on appeal, this argument is procedurally barred from review. For his final argument for reversal, Bridges alleges that the jury's conclusion that he was guilty of criminal use of a prohibited weapon under Ark. Code Ann. At trial, Bridges did not contest that the serial number on the sawed- off shotgun had been removed. Thus, Bridges argues that the jury could only find him innocent of possession of a defaced firearm if it determined that he did not in fact possess the shotgun.
Bridges concludes that therefore the two verdicts are inconsistent.
Therefore, the trial court did not err when it denied Bridges's motion for a mistrial due to the inconsistency of the verdicts on the two charges related to his possession of the altered weapon.