Bruner v. State, 2013 Ark. 68

Bruner, Sr. and Workman were convicted in Sebastian County for first-degree battery of their infant son R.B., a class Y felony.
The jury sentenced Bruner to 40 years and Workman to life; this appeal is by Bruner and Workman jointly but with separate briefs.
The circuit court excluded reports by Dr. Paul Deyoub diagnosing Borderline Intellectual Functioning and used to argue lack of capacity to form required mental state.
The defense sought a jury instruction on third-degree battery and a proffered definition of "manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life"; the court rejected both.
The State argued the medical evidence of R.B.’s severe malnutrition and neglect supported a finding of serious physical injury and the appropriate mental state for first-degree battery.
The majority affirms the convictions and sentences, while concurring in part with dissents regarding the third-degree instruction and the mental-evaluation evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of mental-evaluation reports	Bruner/Workman contend reports show IQ; relevant to mental state.	Trial court correctly excluded under Stewart/Hinkston; not admissible to prove lack of specific intent.	No reversible error; exclusion affirmed; harmless given other evidence.
Lesser-included offense: third-degree battery	There was evidence to support recklessness; jury should have been instructed.	No rational basis; the injury here is serious, not just physical injury.	Circuit court did not abuse discretion; no instruction required.
Extreme-indifference instruction	Proffered definition should be given to clarify mens rea.	Model AMI instruction already conveys knowledge standard and serious-injury concept.	Model instruction adequate; no separate definition required.

Sbabo v. State, 264 Ark. 497 (1978) (supports refusing third-degree instruction when serious injury shown)
Graham v. State, 290 Ark. 107 (1986) (admissibility of mental-condition evidence on culpable state under Rule 5-2-303)
Stewart v. State, 316 Ark. 153 (1994) (distinguishes insanity defense from specific intent evidence; Rule 704 limitations)
DeGracia v. State, 321 Ark. 530 (1995) (limits expert testimony on ability to conform conduct to law)
Hinkston v. State, 340 Ark. 530 (2000) (relevance limits of mental-condition evidence; not admitted for lack of capacity defense)
Love v. State, 281 Ark. 379 (1984) (nonmodel instruction admissibility when accurate statement of law)
Jones v. State, 2012 Ark. 38 (2012) (slight-evidence standard for lesser-included offenses)