Fink v. State
2015 Ark. 331
| Ark. | 2015Background
- On December 3, 2012, 17‑year‑old Cheyenne Fink encountered 80‑year‑old Loyd Cole during a walk and stabbed him approximately 36 times; Cole died of stab wounds.
- Fink returned home with a large cut on her arm, showered, tried to wash bloodstained clothes, hid knives, and left a blood trail from Cole’s body to her house.
- Police found knives (one under her pillow) and bloodstained clothing; DNA from a knife and Fink’s pants matched Cole. Fink initially denied remembering the encounter and claimed self‑harm that morning.
- The State charged Fink with first‑degree murder (purposeful killing). Fink asserted an affirmative defense of mental disease or defect and presented expert testimony supporting incapacity to conform conduct.
- The State presented contrary expert testimony that Fink was functioning at a sophisticated level that day and was not exhibiting active psychosis; jurors rejected the mental‑disease defense, convicted Fink of first‑degree murder, and sentenced her to life.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Fink) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence that Fink acted purposely | Evidence (stab wounds, post‑offense concealment, coherent interactions) supports a finding of purpose | Mental condition prevented formation of purposeful intent | Affirmed — substantial evidence supports purposeful killing |
| Sufficiency re: affirmative defense of mental disease/defect | Jury could credit State expert and reject defense; no preponderance shown | Fink proved by preponderance she had mental disease preventing conformity | Affirmed — jury reasonably credited State expert; defense not proved by preponderance |
| Prosecutor misconduct in closing (Wicks exceptions) | No contemporaneous objection; Wicks exceptions inapplicable | Prosecutor’s remarks (e.g., "psycho‑babble," "so‑called expert") were so prejudicial trial court should have intervened | Affirmed — issue not preserved; Wicks exceptions not met |
| Preservation and harmless‑error review | Court reviewed record for prejudicial error under Rule 4‑3(i) | Same | No reversible error found |
Key Cases Cited
- Durham v. State, 320 Ark. 689 (discusses directed‑verdict/sufficiency review)
- Malone v. State, 364 Ark. 256 (definition and standard for substantial evidence)
- Mathis v. State, 2012 Ark. App. 285 (appellate review defers to jury on credibility)
- Davis v. State, 368 Ark. 401 (burden and review standard for mental‑disease affirmative defense)
- Wicks v. State, 270 Ark. 781 (contemporaneous‑objection rule and narrow exceptions)
- Anderson v. State, 353 Ark. 384 (application and narrow scope of Wicks exceptions)
- Thomas v. State, 370 Ark. 70 (preservation rules require objection at first opportunity)