Lovelace v. State
2017 Ark. App. 146
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Aaron Lovelace was convicted by a Jefferson County jury of aggravated robbery, first-degree battery (by means of a firearm), and misdemeanor theft for an incident on June 23, 2014, in which the victim, Calvin Giles, was shot and had cash and a check taken.
- Church’s surveillance video showed Lovelace in a gray Equinox at the restaurant, wearing green shoelaces, watching Giles pay, and the Equinox leaving after Giles. A still-warm Church’s food box was later found in the vehicle.
- Giles testified he was shot on his porch, identified the shooter as wearing green shoelaces, and identified Lovelace in the Church’s video as the person with the green shoelaces.
- Co-defendant Anphernie Harris (an accomplice) testified that Lovelace and others followed Giles from the restaurant, that shots were fired, that Lovelace said he shot Giles and told Harris not to say anything; Harris had been initially untruthful to police but later gave a statement matching trial testimony.
- Police stopped a gray Equinox soon after the shooting; two men fled, a gun was discarded, Giles’s check was found near the vehicle, and Lovelace was identified from the video. No usable fingerprints or GSR/DNA tied the gun or items to Lovelace.
- The jury recommended consecutive sentences (20 years for aggravated robbery; 30 years for first-degree battery); the trial court accepted but the sentencing order mistakenly listed the total as 30 years instead of 50.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency / accomplice corroboration for first-degree battery | State: Harris’s testimony corroborated by video, Giles’s ID, vehicle match, flight, warm food box, and recovered check; evidence independently links Lovelace to the shooting. | Lovelace: Conviction rests solely on uncorroborated accomplice testimony (Harris); other evidence insufficient to connect him to the shooting. | Affirmed — corroborating circumstantial evidence (video, shoelaces ID, vehicle match, flight, recovered check, warm food box) sufficiently connects Lovelace to the battery. |
| Preservation of accomplice-corroboration argument for aggravated robbery | State: (implicit) sufficiency preserved as raised generally. | Lovelace: appellate challenge that Harris was uncorroborated for robbery. | Not preserved — Lovelace did not raise accomplice-corroboration at trial for aggravated robbery, so he cannot raise it on appeal. Court notes it would have affirmed on same grounds as battery. |
| Misdemeanor theft — whether accomplice testimony requires corroboration | Lovelace: accomplice rule bars conviction without corroboration. | State: accomplice corroboration rule does not apply to misdemeanor theft convictions; accomplice testimony alone may suffice. | Affirmed — because the theft was a misdemeanor, accomplice testimony alone can support the conviction. |
| Sentencing order discrepancy | State: jury recommended consecutive sentences and trial court accepted that recommendation. | Lovelace: (implicit) sentencing order inconsistent with jury recommendation and oral pronouncement. | Remanded to correct clerical error — sentencing order must reflect consecutive sentences totaling fifty years. |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. State, 493 S.W.3d 339 (Ark. Ct. App.) (directed-verdict / sufficiency standard)
- Robinson v. State, 491 S.W.3d 481 (Ark. Ct. App.) (viewing evidence in light most favorable to verdict; credibility for jury)
- Smith v. State, 423 S.W.3d 624 (Ark. Ct. App.) (accomplice-testimony corroboration rules and sufficiency test)
- Anderson v. State, 118 S.W.3d 574 (Ark.) (flight as corroborating evidence of guilt)