{
  "id": 1889859,
  "name": "Roosevelt FERGUSON v. STATE of Arkansas",
  "name_abbreviation": "Ferguson v. State",
  "decision_date": "1989-05-08",
  "docket_number": "CR 88-213",
  "first_page": "600",
  "last_page": "602",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "298 Ark. 600"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "769 S.W.2d 418"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "293 Ark. 541",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1869667
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1987,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/293/0541-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "265 Ark. 409",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1664827
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1979,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/265/0409-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "296 Ark. 135",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1892700
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1988,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/296/0135-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-10-101",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "Ark. Code Ann.",
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "a"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "294 Ark. 117",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1895821
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1987,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/294/0117-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "297 Ark. 115",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1891340
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1988,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/297/0115-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "297 Ark. 296",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1891439
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1988,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/297/0296-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 323,
    "char_count": 4247,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.837,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.066756741533275e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5585758088598988
    },
    "sha256": "4b296cb228d5a660dde86fa3c029e48493beb80dd4071811d3491092a6c0ce41",
    "simhash": "1:bfa62926685e1a10",
    "word_count": 706
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:49:53.094543+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Roosevelt FERGUSON v. STATE of Arkansas"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Robert H. Dudley, Justice.\nThe appellant was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole. The sole issue on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm the judgment of conviction.\nIn considering the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, we need consider only the evidence favorable to the appellee and affirm if the jury\u2019s verdict is supported by substantial evidence. Moore v. State, 297 Ark. 296, 761 S.W.2d 894 (1988). Substantial evidence is evidence of sufficient force and character that it will, with reasonable and material certainty, compel a conclusion one way or the other, forcing the mind to pass beyond mere suspicion and conjecture: Bennett v. State, 297 Ark. 115, 759 S.W.2d 799 (1988). Circumstantial evidence may constitute substantial evidence to support a conviction. Still v. State, 294 Ark. 117, 740 S.W.2d 926 (1987).\nThe evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, is as follows. The victim, Annie Bell Hall Killingsworth, the owner of an apartment complex, was murdered on the night of July 31,1986. Medical evidence showed that she died of simultaneous suffocation and strangulation. The medical examiner testified that the simultaneous suffocation and strangulation was evidence that two people physically participated in the murder. Entry into the victim\u2019s apartment was gained by removing the glass from a window. Milton Jones\u2019s fingerprints were found at the place of entry. The victim had about $ 10,000.00 in cash in her apartment, and it was gone when her corpse was found. The foregoing is circumstantial evidence that Milton Jones and someone else burglarized the victim\u2019s apartment and in the course of, or in the furtherance of the burglary, murdered the victim. This meets the definition of capital murder. See Ark. Code Ann. \u00a7 5-10-101 (a)(1) (1987).\nThe evidence further reveals that Erma McCoy saw Milton Jones and the appellant behind the victim\u2019s apartment late on the night of July 31st. Ms. McCoy testified that when she saw them, the appellant told Milton Jones, \u201cMilton, get Erma, grab Erma.\u201d Immediately afterwards he said, \u201cShe\u2019s dead.\u201d Since Ms. McCoy is still alive, the jurors were free to infer that the latter statement was about the victim.\nAfter the murder the appellant fled to Kansas City and later to California. Jones was arrested shortly after the murder, was convicted of capital murder, and sentenced to life without parole. Jones v. State, 296 Ark. 135, 752 S.W.2d 274 (1988). Appellant was not apprehended until April of 1988. At that time he gave a statement in which he confessed that he and Jones had been drinking on July 31st when Jones suggested that they rob Ms. Killingsworth. He said Jones removed the window glass and went in first. Appellant followed. Jones was in the victim\u2019s bedroom looking for money when she saw him. Appellant said that Jones killed Ms. Killingsworth because he thought she recognized him. He said he personally went in for the sole purpose of taking the cash.\nAt trial he took the stand and changed his story. He testified that by the time he went through the window, Jones had already killed Ms. Killingsworth and was sorting through her belongings. He said he only took a pillow off her face and put it on her chest.\nClearly there was sufficient proof to support the verdict of guilty. Direct evidence places the appellant at the scene of the crime and taking part in the burglary. Circumstantial evidence shows him participating in the murder. The jury was free to accept some parts of appellant\u2019s testimony and reject other parts. Core v. State, 265 Ark. 409, 578 S.W.2d 581 (1979). Further, his flight to avoid arrest can be considered as corroboration of evidence tending to establish guilt. Yedrysek v. State, 293 Ark. 541, 739 S.W.2d 672 (1987).\nPursuant to Rule 11 (f) of the Rules of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals of Arkansas, we have reviewed all objections decided adversely to the appellant and find no prejudicial error.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Robert H. Dudley, Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Maxie G. Kizer, for appellant.",
      "Steve Clark, Att\u2019y Gen., by: J. Brent Standridge, Asst. Att\u2019y Gen., for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Roosevelt FERGUSON v. STATE of Arkansas\nCR 88-213\n769 S.W.2d 418\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered May 8, 1989\nMaxie G. Kizer, for appellant.\nSteve Clark, Att\u2019y Gen., by: J. Brent Standridge, Asst. Att\u2019y Gen., for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0600-01",
  "first_page_order": 636,
  "last_page_order": 638
}