Davis v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 234

Davis appealed bench-trial convictions for residential burglary and second-degree assault on a family member, with sentencing as a habitual offender to concurrent 15-year and 1-year terms.
Victim, Davis’s ex-wife, had an active protective order prohibiting contact and Davis from the home or its vicinity.
Around 12:30 a.m. on Oct. 5, 2013, Davis entered the victim’s home by prying a screen and breaking in through a back window.
Davis chased the victim, attempted to take the telephone, and assaulted her while she called 911, making threats and causing injuries.
The trial court found Davis guilty of burglary with intent to commit an offense punishable by imprisonment and of second-degree assault; the assault sentence was later deemed illegal.
On appeal, the court affirmed the burglary conviction, and modified the assault sentence to 90 days, to be served concurrently with the burglary term.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of burglary intent evidence	Davis argues there was no substantial evidence he entered to commit a punishable offense.	Davis contends the entry alone does not prove intent to commit imprisonment-punishable offense.	Evidence supports intent to assault; burglary upheld.
Legal validity of the assault sentence	The assault sentence was improper under statute.	Not explicitly stated; argues errorless interpretation.	Assault sentence modified to 90 days, concurrent with burglary.

Adams v. State, 435 S.W.3d 520 (Ark. 2014) (circumstantial evidence may support conviction if no reasonable hypothesis of innocence remains)
Davis v. State, 378 S.W.3d 873 (Ark. App. 2011) (rebuttable standard for reviewing sufficiency; substantial evidence required)
Washington v. State, 599 S.W.2d 408 (Ark. 1980) (circumstantial evidence may prove intent)
Breeden v. State, 427 S.W.3d 5 (Ark. 2013) (Court may address illegal sentence without remand)