Draft v. State
2016 Ark. App. 216
Ark. Ct. App.2016Background
- On May 18, 2014, Robert Draft beat his wife; she fled to her parents’ home and sought medical care.
- Draft drove to his in‑laws’ property with a loaded .223 semi‑automatic rifle; a brief confrontation with his father‑in‑law, Douglas Cloyes, occurred about 65 feet from Draft’s truck.
- Draft testified he fired the rifle at Cloyes after Cloyes began shooting at him; Draft admitted pulling the trigger at least 13 times; five rounds struck Cloyes, causing his death.
- A .22 pistol and three spent .22 cartridges were found at the scene; at least thirteen spent .223 casings were found roughly sixty‑five feet from the body near truck tracks.
- After the shooting, Draft disassembled the rifle, disposed of it in a river, collected money and a phone, and fled to Michigan; he was later charged with first‑degree murder (convicted of the lesser included second‑degree murder) and second‑degree battery.
- At trial, Draft moved for directed verdicts arguing the State failed to prove he caused the death and failed to prove he acted knowingly; those motions were denied. He appeals only the sufficiency of evidence on the knowing element of second‑degree murder.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Draft's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether substantial evidence supports that Draft "knowingly" caused Cloyes’s death for second‑degree murder | Evidence (shooting from ~65 ft, 13 trigger pulls, 5 fatal hits, flight and concealment) permits inference Draft acted with awareness that death was practically certain | Evidence insufficient to show Draft acted "knowingly"; challenges that mens rea not proven beyond speculation | Affirmed: substantial circumstantial evidence supported that Draft knowingly caused death |
| Whether insufficiency argument as to negating self‑defense preserved for appeal | Not applicable at trial because Draft did not raise self‑defense in directed‑verdict motions | Argues evidence insufficient to disprove self‑defense (raised on appeal) | Not addressed on appeal; issue waived for failure to preserve by specific directed‑verdict motion |
Key Cases Cited
- Steele v. State, 434 S.W.3d 424 (2014) (standards for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence in criminal appeals)
- Davis v. State, 459 S.W.3d 821 (2015) (review only evidence supporting the verdict; view in light most favorable to the State)
- Satterfield v. State, 448 S.W.3d 211 (2014) (intent/state of mind usually inferred from circumstances; weapon type, manner of use, wounds, and post‑offense conduct are relevant)
- Anderson v. State, 353 Ark. 384, 108 S.W.3d 592 (2003) (when justification is raised, prosecution must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt)