Ark. Code Ann. § 5-11-101 (2026)

Case Notes

Jurisdiction.

Defendant's contention that the evidence was insufficient to prove that the murder took place in Arkansas was rejected as, although evidence showed that the victim's body was found in Oklahoma, and there was no positive evidence presented that the crime actually occurred outside of Arkansas; the record provided ample substantial evidence that, at the very least, the premeditation and deliberation element of capital murder and kidnapping by deception occurred in Arkansas. Smith v. State, 367 Ark. 274, 239 S.W.3d 494 (2006).

Restraint Without Consent.

Where the defendant restrained the prosecutrix for the purpose of committing rape, and her children were restrained of their liberty by being kept in the car throughout the episode and the restraint was for the purpose of facilitating the commission of the principal offense, the proof was sufficient to support the three convictions of kidnapping. Dyer v. State, 290 Ark. 405, 720 S.W.2d 297 (1986).

There was sufficient evidence of restraint to sustain conviction for kidnapping where the victim was deceived into returning to the defendant's house. Fairchild v. State, 305 Ark. 406, 808 S.W.2d 743 (1991).

Evidence was sufficient to show restraint without consent where the defendant restrained the victim by threat of force with a firearm and the victim's hands were bound behind her back. Williams v. State, 338 Ark. 97, 991 S.W.2d 565 (1999).

Pursuant to subdivision (2) of this section and § 5-11-102(a)(1) and (4), the restraint employed by defendant exceeded that which was necessary to effectuate the rapes of the two victims and, thus, supported defendant's separate convictions for kidnapping because (1) defendant continued to hold his victims hostage after the rapes were completed; (2) during the ordeal, defendant threatened, poked, slapped, and hit the victims both with his fist and with a vase; and (3) defendant not only raped the victims, but he demanded money from them as well. Moore v. State, 355 Ark. 657, 144 S.W.3d 260 (2004).

Where defendant car jacked a mother and her children, substantial evidence supported the Class Y kidnapping convictions where the victims were not released into safety the of a home but on an unfamiliar dark country road, the mother had been beaten, raped, and threatened with death, and she feared defendant might try to run over her when she was left alone on the road and, clearly, defendant had not known that a house was nearby. Ratliff v. State, 359 Ark. 479, 199 S.W.3d 79 (2004).

Evidence was sufficient to sustain defendant's kidnapping conviction as the 13 year old victim's mother relied upon the representation that defendant was taking the victim to the movies with his daughter when she gave permission for the victim to leave her home with defendant; the victim's mother did not consent to defendant escorting her daughter to a motel room under the guise of meeting someone briefly before meeting her daughter at the movies. Mitchem v. State, 96 Ark. App. 78, 238 S.W.3d 623 (2006).

Record disclosed that defendant disabled the rape victim's vehicle, hoisted her out of the vehicle, and dragged her into the house; when the victim attempted to escape by running outside, defendant forcibly pulled her back inside the house. While being dragged to the bedroom the victim tried to hang onto door frames, but defendant overcame those efforts as well; therefore, the Court of Appeals of Arkansas held that substantial evidence supported defendant's conviction for kidnapping under § 5-11-102(a)(5) because he restrained the victim for purposes of subdivision (3) of this section. Henson v. State, 2009 Ark. App. 464, 320 S.W.3d 19 (2009).

There was sufficient evidence to support appellant's conviction for kidnapping; appellant substantially interfered with the victim's liberty interest by physically threatening her and impeding her egress from the home. The victim voiced her decision that she was leaving, thus expressing her intention and revoking her consent to remain at appellant's home; appellant then stood up, slammed the door telling the victim that she was not going anywhere and told her to go to his bedroom and when the victim refused, appellant slapped her and told her that he had a .380 pistol and would kill her if she said anything. Hickey v. State, 2010 Ark. 109 (2010).

Counsel was not ineffective for failing to move for a directed verdict on the issue of the amount of restraint used to commit a kidnapping because the state presented substantial evidence that defendant used deception to restrain the victim under subdivision (3)(A) of this section; defendant told the victim he was a police officer and showed her a badge, which constituted deception. Prater v. State, 2012 Ark. 164, 402 S.W.3d 68 (2012).

Sufficient evidence supported defendant's kidnapping conviction as there was overwhelming evidence that defendant restrained the victim, and he threatened to kill her and her son; the victim testified how defendant restrained her with cables and locks for hours while he severely beat her, and defendant repeatedly told her that he was going to kill her and behead her son. The fact that the victim did not attempt to escape immediately after the restraints had been removed did not negate defendant's criminal conduct, nor did the fact that he later helped her bathe. Reynolds v. State, 2016 Ark. 214, 492 S.W.3d 491 (2016).

There was substantial evidence of restraint of the victim's liberty as the victim was tackled to the ground by defendant when jogging on a trail at a lake, and defendant straddled the victim's body, beat her with his fists, and choked her with his hands. Defendant also dragged the victim into the woods until she could no longer see the running trail. Turner v. State, 2018 Ark. App. 5, 538 S.W.3d 227 (2018).

Cited: Wallace v. Lockhart, 701 F.2d 719 (8th Cir. 1983); Cozzaglio v. State, 289 Ark. 33, 709 S.W.2d 70 (1986).