Smith v. State
2012 Ark. App. 534
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Claude Smith convicted of aggravated robbery in Jackson County? (The text says Miller County) and sentenced to 30 years.
- Two accomplices identified Smith as “E.T.”; surveillance video showed three robbers but faces were not seen.
- Gamble and Harris were accomplices; Shelton testified about getaway vehicle and E.T.’s description.
- Shelton’s and Riley’s statements aided police identification of Smith; Riley testified Smith borrowed a tan Blazer.
- Defense challenged sufficiency of corroboration for accomplice testimony and moved for mistrial after Gamble referenced a prior robbery conviction; trial court denied both motions; the jury convicted Smith.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of corroboration for accomplice testimony | Smith argues accomplice testimony alone cannot convict without corroboration. | Smith contends no independent evidence connects him to the crime. | Corroboration present; video plus non-accomplice testimony connected Smith. |
| Mistrial due to reference to prior conviction | Gamble’s remark about Smith’s prior robbery prejudiced Smith. | Judge admonished jury; no manifest prejudice; mistrial inappropriate. | No abuse of discretion; admonitions sufficed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Tate v. State, 357 Ark. 369, 167 S.W.3d 655 (2004) (standards for corroboration of accomplice testimony)
- Martin v. State, 346 Ark. 198, 57 S.W.3d 136 (2001) (test for corroborating evidence remains independent of accomplice)
- MacKool v. State, ? (?) (circumstantial evidence may support accomplice testimony)
- Snider v. State, 2010 Ark. App. 694, 378 S.W.3d 264 (2010) (surveillance video corroboration of crime)
- Parker v. State, 355 Ark. 639, 144 S.W.3d 270 (2004) (mistrial discretion and prejudice)
- Killian v. State, 96 Ark.App. 92, 238 S.W.3d 629 (2006) (prejudice from prior convictions during guilt phase)