FROM THE CRAIGHEAD COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, WESTERN DISTRICT
[NO. 16JCR-15-1325] HONORABLE BRENT DAVIS, JUDGE
Willard Proctor, Jr., P.A., by: Willard Proctor, Jr., for
Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: Pamela Rumpz, Ass't
Att'y Gen., for appellee.
BRANDON J. HARRISON, JUDGE
Miller was convicted of first-degree murder and aggravated
robbery and now appeals his convictions, arguing that the
circuit court erred in denying the admission of certain
evidence, allowing expert testimony regarding fingerprints,
denying two motions for mistrial, and denying his motion for
a new trial. We affirm.
December 2015, Miller was charged with first-degree murder
and aggravated robbery. The State alleged that Miller,
Kazanna Dixon, and Rodshey Walker robbed George Banks in his
home, that Mr. Banks was shot during the robbery, and that
Mr. Banks died appromimately twenty days later from his
injuries. A jury trial was held over two days in August 2017.
The jury found Miller guilty on both counts, and he was
sentenced to thirty years' imprisonment and forty
years' imprisonment, respectively, to run consecutively.
Miller has timely appealed his convictions. Miller does not
challenge the sufficiency of the evidence, so a detailed
recitation of the facts is not necessary. Specific facts
related to the points on appeal will be discussed as needed.
admissibility of evidence is left to the discretion of the
circuit court, and we will not reverse a decision to admit or
exclude evidence absent an abuse of discretion. Moore v.
State, 2017 Ark.App. 39, 511 S.W.3d 880. An abuse of
discretion occurs when the circuit court acts improvidently,
thoughtlessly, or without due consideration.
Hajek-McClure v. State, 2014 Ark.App. 690, 450
401 of the Arkansas Rules of Evidence defines relevant
evidence as "evidence having any tendency to make the
existence of any fact that is of consequence to the
determination of the action more probable or less probable
than it would be without the evidence." Ark. R. Evid.
401. Arkansas Rule of Evidence 402 further provides that
"[e]vidence which is not relevant is not
admissible." Although relevant, evidence may be excluded
if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the
danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or
misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay,
waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative
evidence. Ark. R. Evid. 403.
trial, Dr. Charles Kokes, the state medical examiner,
testified that he performed the autopsy on Banks's body
on November 25. Dr. Kokes explained that Mr. Banks had four
separate gunshot injuries-the most serious of which passed
through the neck and injured the right subclavian artery. Dr.
Kokes stated that the gunshot wounds proximately caused
Banks's death. On cross-examination, Dr. Kokes was
questioned about some of Banks's medical records dated
Defense Counsel: Is that one of the records you reviewed?
Dr. Kokes: I probably did; yes.
Defense Counsel: Okay. And in this record, you indicated that
it was a 30-year-old, gunshot wound to the right back, left
hand, and it says continue, it's got
"slash/as"; do you know what that is?
Dr. Kokes: That's, uh, that means 81 micrograms, uh,
acetosalic silic [sic] acid, which is aspirin.
Defense Counsel: Okay, All right. And the third one down
here, no further vascular surgery issues at the time?
Dr. Kokes: Yes.
Defense Counsel: All right. Then I want to go up to page 220
of 459, and it says "A/P"; what does that stand
Dr. Kokes: That stands for Assessment and Plan.
Defense Counsel: Okay. And it says "the patient doing
well from a vascular standpoint, with adequate palpable RUE
and RLE." ...