Ark. Code Ann. § 5-39-204 (2026)

Case Notes

Conspiracy.

Defendant committed an overt act in furtherance of a conspiracy to commit kidnapping, aggravated robbery, theft of property, and aggravated residential burglary because he took another person to his residence and showed the person the inside of the premises, discussed how to break in the residence and how to subdue his wife, and identified the property to be taken from the residence. Winkler v. State, 2012 Ark. App. 704, 425 S.W.3d 808 (2012).

Evidence, Admission.

Where cross-examination of the victim at trial revealed that the State's exhibit of text messages between the defendant and victim was incomplete and that the victim had deleted some of the messages, the appellate court did not have to decide whether the circuit court erred in failing to strike the exhibit because any error that existed was harmless given the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt that remained. Farmer v. State, 2019 Ark. App. 148, 571 S.W.3d 78 (2019).

Insufficient Evidence.

Conviction for aggravated residential burglary was reversed because there was insufficient evidence that defendant attempted to inflict a serious physical injury under subdivision (a)(2) of this section. Serious physical injury could be inflicted during a sexual assault, but under current Arkansas law, a sexual assault does not necessarily constitute a serious physical injury; even assuming that defendant did intend to sexually assault the victim, defendant's intention, combined with his grabbing her shoulder and causing a minor scratch to her baby's face, did not constitute a substantial step under § 5-3-201 toward inflicting a serious physical injury, as defined by § 5-1-102. Inskeep v. State, 2016 Ark. App. 135, 484 S.W.3d 709 (2016).

Where defendant's conviction for aggravated residential burglary was reversed and defendant did not dispute that residential burglary was proven, his 40-year sentence was modified to the maximum allowed for residential burglary, a Class B felony, which was 20 years' imprisonment. Inskeep v. State, 2016 Ark. App. 135, 484 S.W.3d 709 (2016).

Sufficient Evidence.

Evidence was more than sufficient to prove that defendant did not have permission to be in the residence, because the victim ran from his residence yelling that he needed help and asking someone to call the police. Lewis v. State, 2009 Ark. App. 504, 323 S.W.3d 640 (2009).

Defendant's convictions for two counts of aggravated burglary were proper under § 5-39-201(a) and subsection (a) of this section because defendant's argument that there was no direct proof on the record of defendant holding a gun was without merit since substantial circumstantial evidence supported a finding of guilt, either as a principal or an accomplice. A neighbor verified that one of the intruders had a gun, the victim told the officers that the intruders hid their guns in the closet, where two guns were found, and both intruders were charged in the same instrument, implicating accomplice liability; that provided substantial evidence supporting the finding that the intruders at minimum represented by word or conduct that they were armed as a threat. Hinton v. State, 2010 Ark. App. 341 (2010).

Circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support defendant's aggravated burglary conviction under subdivisions (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section because the evidence showed that the victim shot an intruder as the victim leaned over a railing in the house sometime after 2:30 a.m., that defendant appeared at a hospital with a gunshot wound a short time later, that the bullet's trajectory as it traveled through defendant's body was consistent with the shot having been fired from above, that a .45-caliber slug removed from defendant's body and a spent shell casing found in the victim's handgun were the same caliber, that a slug removed from the burglary location was fired from a gun recovered from a vehicle of defendant's girlfriend, and that defendant's shoe prints matched those found on the townhouse's front door. Thornton v. State, 2010 Ark. App. 569 (2010).

Defendant's convictions for aggravated residential burglary in violation of subsection (a) of this section and aggravated robbery in violation of § 5-12-103(a) were appropriate because the state provided sufficient evidence to corroborate his accomplices' testimony; even eliminating the accomplice testimony, the remaining evidence presented independently established the crimes and tended to connect defendant with their commission. In part, witnesses testified about defendant being with the accomplices on the day of the crimes and the state also presented a witness's testimony that defendant had sold him the three shotguns that were identified as being the ones stolen from the victim. Tucker v. State, 2011 Ark. 144, 381 S.W.3d 1 (2011).

Evidence that defendant entered the victim's locked trailer in the early morning hours while the victim was asleep and struggled with and stabbed the victim supported defendant's conviction for aggravated residential burglary. Holt v. State, 2011 Ark. 391, 384 S.W.3d 498 (2011).

Appellant's convictions for aggravated robbery, aggravated residential burglary, and misdemeanor fleeing were affirmed where a witness testified that appellant pointed a sawed-off shotgun at his head, which would necessarily constitute proof that appellant was “armed with a deadly weapon”; the testimony of one eyewitness was sufficient to sustain a conviction. Riley v. State, 2011 Ark. App. 511, 385 S.W.3d 355 (2011).

Evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for aggravated robbery and aggravated residential burglary because the victim testified that when defendant came into her house, he told her to give him her money and that he was going to kill her. Defendant had a paper bag over his right hand and his right hand was pointing directly at her stomach; she believed that there was a gun in the paper bag. Dobbins v. State, 2013 Ark. App. 269 (2013).

Defendant’s conviction for aggravated burglary was supported by the victim’s belief that defendant had a gun and might shoot her and the fact that the victim’s garage fell within the definition of a “residential occupiable structure” under § 5-39-101(4)(A)(i), because it was a building or structure in which the victim lived. Horton v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 250 (2014).

Evidence was sufficient to convict defendant of aggravated residential burglary because defendant was an accomplice in the aggravated residential burglary, and, thus, it was irrelevant whether defendant entered the house or not as her accomplice clearly entered the house; defendant was in the vicinity of the crime, she was holding a knife, and, according to the victim's testimony, she ran toward the victim with the knife after the victim chased the accomplice out of his house; and the trial court was not required to believe defendant's version of events that the accomplice never asked defendant to assist with the crime, and her testimony that she would never use a knife in a violent manner. Wilson v. State, 2016 Ark. App. 218, 489 S.W.3d 716 (2016).

Evidence that defendant entered a home without permission in the middle of the night, armed with a gun that he brandished at the victim, and threatened to kill the victim was sufficient for the jury to find that defendant entered the home with the intent to commit a felony, and thus supported defendant's conviction for aggravated residential burglary. Armour v. State, 2016 Ark. App. 612, 509 S.W.3d 668 (2016).

Cited: Stephens v. State, — Ark. App. —, — S.W.3d — , 2010 Ark. App. LEXIS 382 (Apr. 28, 2010).