Smith v. State , 2014 Ark. App. 625 ( 2014 )

Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 625
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION III
CR-14-156
No.
Opinion Delivered November 5, 2014
TODD AARON SMITH APPEAL FROM THE MILLER
APPELLANT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. CR-2013-188]
V.
HONORABLE JOE E. GRIFFIN,
STATE OF ARKANSAS JUDGE
APPELLEE
AFFIRMED
RHONDA K. WOOD, Judge
Appellant Todd Aaron Smith contests his jury conviction of one count of rape.
His sole issue on appeal is that the circuit court erred when it denied his motion for
directed verdict. We find no error and affirm.
On appeal, this court treats a motion for directed verdict as a challenge to the
sufficiency of the evidence. Smoak v. State, 2011 Ark. 529, 385 S.W.3d 257. In
reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, this court determines whether
the verdict is supported by substantial evidence, direct or circumstantial. Id.
Substantial evidence is evidence forceful enough to compel a conclusion one way or
the other beyond suspicion or conjecture. Id. This court views the evidence in the
light most favorable to the verdict, and only evidence supporting the verdict will be
considered. Id.
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 625
A jury convicted Smith of rape in violation of Arkansas Code Annotated
section 5-14-103(a)(3)(A) (Repl. 2013). Rape is defined in this subsection as engaging
in sexual intercourse or deviate sexual activity with a person less than fourteen years of
age. Id. At trial, J.C., the eight-year-old victim, testified that Smith “put his private in
my private” and that it hurt “really bad.” She explained that when it was over she saw
blood on his bed, where the attack had occurred. The sexual-assault nurse examiner
testified that J.C. had a cleft in her hymen that was indicative of trauma to the area and
could indicate that there was sexual penetration. J.C.’s six-year-old sister, Gr.C.,
testified that Smith touched her inappropriately as well and that she had seen him “get
on top of” J.C. and their younger sister, four-year-old Ga.C.
A rape victim’s uncorroborated testimony describing penetration may constitute
substantial evidence to sustain a conviction of rape, even when the victim is a child.
Brown v. State, 374 Ark. 341, 288 S.W.3d 226 (2008). A rape victim’s testimony need
not be corroborated, and scientific evidence directly linking the defendant to the crime
is not required. Kelley v. State, 375 Ark. 483, 292 S.W.3d 297 (2009). Moreover, it is
the function of the jury, and not this court, to evaluate the credibility of witnesses and
to resolve any inconsistencies in the evidence. Vance v. State, 2011 Ark. 392, 384
S.W.3d 515.
In this case, the jury heard testimony from (1) the victim regarding penetration,
(2) the nurse regarding trauma to the victim’s hymen consistent with rape, and (3) the
sister corroborating inappropriate sexual conduct and opportunity. This was substantial
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 625
evidence to support the jury’s verdict of rape. We affirm.
Affirmed.
GLOVER and VAUGHT, JJ., agree.
Phillip A. McGough, P.A., by: Phillip A. McGough, for appellant.
Dustin McDaniel, Att’y Gen., by: Lauren Elizabeth Heil, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for
appellee.