Winkler v. State
2012 Ark. App. 704
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Appellant Jeffrey Winkler was convicted by a Jefferson County jury of conspiracy to commit kidnapping, aggravated robbery, theft of property, and aggravated residential burglary; he was sentenced to nine years.
- The State alleged an overt act occurred when Winkler guided Sylvester Jones to Winkler’s residence, showed the premises, and gave Jones instructions to break in and commit theft and harm to Winkler’s wife.
- Jones testified Winkler proposed kidnapping, burglary, and harm to Mrs. Winkler, offering payment for the crime and planning to have it executed by Monday morning.
- Winkler moved for directed verdict arguing no overt act had been proven; the court denied, and the jury eventually found conspiracy with multiple object offenses under one prosecution.
- During trial, the State presented evidence of a firearm and the planned on-site rehearsal at Winkler’s home; Winkler gave a taped statement to police after arrest.
- On appeal, Winkler challenged (a) sufficiency of the evidence for an overt act, (b) the State’s multi-offense conspiracy charging, and (c) the legality of the nine-year sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of overt act for conspiracy | Winkler: no overt act beyond planning; on-site conduct was planning alone. | State: actions at Winkler’s residence constituted an overt act. | Overt acts found; substantial evidence supports conspiracy. |
| Conspiracy to commit multiple offenses | McMillan requires one conspiracy; multiple Object offenses merged; improper to prosecute multiple conspiracies. | State: one conspiracy can involve multiple object offenses; no double jeopardy since one prosecution. | One conspiracy prosecuted for multiple objects; not error; no prejudice in verdict form. |
| Sentencing legality | Conspiracy as standalone not a crime; merger of offenses without statutory authority. | Conspiracy exists and sentencing within statutory range; no void sentence. | Sentence valid; conspiracy is a crime when tied to an object offense; nine-year term within range. |
Key Cases Cited
- McMillan v. Donovan, 301 Ark. 393 (1990) (one agreement to commit multiple offenses is the conspiracy; merger principle applies)
- Shrader v. State, 13 Ark.App. 17 (1984) (planning an offense alone is not an overt act)
- Guinn v. State, 27 Ark.App. 260 (1989) (overt acts in furtherance of an agreement may follow planning)
- Colbert v. State, 2011 Ark. App. 507 (2011) (conspiracy classification and sentencing within statutory framework)
- United States v. Joiner, 418 F.3d 863 (8th Cir. 2005) (conspiracy complete on agreement and overt act, not dependent on success)
- United States v. Littlefield, 594 F.2d 682 (8th Cir. 1979) (overt act requirement and scope of conspiracy)
- Braverman v. United States, 317 U.S. 49 (1942) (agency of agreement and object-oriented conspiracy analysis)