Frederic v. State, 560 S.W.3d 494

Defendant Philip Frederic engaged in sexually explicit Kik chats with an undercover officer posing as a father ("T.J.") who claimed his daughter "Kaci" was 13; Frederic repeatedly expressed a desire to have sex with the child.
Frederic sent photos of himself and his 15‑year‑old daughter, negotiated a meeting, asked what gifts to bring, and agreed to meet at an Exxon station in Mayflower.
At the arranged time Frederic arrived in the described van and was arrested; officers found Michelob Ultra beers and pink/purple glitter nail polish (items "T.J." said the girl liked) in his van.
Frederic was tried and convicted by a jury of conspiracy to commit rape and sentenced to 30 years.
On appeal Frederic argued the evidence was insufficient to support the conspiracy conviction, advancing particular contentions about who posted the Craigslist ad, who initiated contact, and that his conduct was research.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy to commit rape	State: Texts and overt acts (arrival, gifts) show agreement and an overt act in furtherance	Frederic: Evidence does not exclude other reasonable explanations; claimed research intent	Affirmed — substantial evidence supports conspiracy conviction
Whether posting the Craigslist ad was proven	State: Other admissions and context support that Frederic posted or participated in scheme; but posting not required	Frederic: Denied posting the ad; argued lack of direct proof	Rejected — jury may disbelieve his testimony; posting not necessary to prove conspiracy
Who initiated online contact	State: Irrelevant; focus is on content and mutual agreement	Frederic: He did not initiate contact, so plan attribution is weaker	Rejected — initiation irrelevant; Frederic initiated plan elements and meeting logistics
Credibility of Frederic’s "research" defense	State: Research story inconsistent and not raised post‑arrest; jury free to reject it	Frederic: Claimed academic/research motive, not intent to commit crime	Rejected — credibility for jury; conviction stands when evidence supports guilt

Moore v. State, 372 Ark. 579 (2008) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence; view evidence in light most favorable to State)
Brown v. State, 374 Ark. 341 (2008) (jury may disbelieve defendant's self‑serving testimony)
Savannah v. State, 7 Ark. App. 161 (1983) (conspiracy is complete upon agreement plus overt act)
Winkler v. State, 425 S.W.3d 808 (Ark. Ct. App. 2012) (conspiracy may be proven by circumstances and inferences from conduct)
United States v. Joiner, 418 F.3d 863 (8th Cir. 2005) (conspiracy doctrine: agreement plus overt act completes the offense)