BRIAN D. MUDD APPELLANT
STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE
FROM THE MILLER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 46CR-17-232]
HONORABLE KIRK JOHNSON, JUDGE
Potter Law Firm, LLP, by: Thomas A. Potter, for appellant.
Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: Christian Harris, Ass't
Att'y Gen., for appellee.
KENNETH S. HIXSON, JUDGE
Brian D. Mudd was convicted in a jury trial of felony theft
by receiving, possession of methamphetamine, and possession
of drug paraphernalia with the purpose to inject, ingest, or
inhale methamphetamine. Mudd was sentenced as a habitual
offender to three consecutive fifteen-year prison terms. Mudd
now appeals, and his sole argument is that there was
insufficient evidence to support the verdicts. We affirm.
test for determining the sufficiency of the evidence is
whether the verdict is supported by substantial evidence,
direct or circumstantial. Bohanan v. State, 72
Ark.App. 422, 38 S.W.3d 902 (2001). Substantial evidence is
evidence forceful enough to compel a conclusion with
reasonable certainty without resort to speculation or
conjecture. Breedlove v. State, 62 Ark.App.
219, 970 S.W.2d 313 (1998). We review the evidence in the
light most favorable to the State, considering only the
evidence that tends to support the verdict. Morton v.
State, 2011 Ark.App. 432, 384 S.W.3d 585.
Murphy testified that he has a collection of old gas and oil
signs from the 1940s and 1950s. He kept some of these signs
under and in front of a shed at his house. One morning Murphy
noticed that some of his signs were missing, and he contacted
the police. Murphy told the police that an acquaintance had
told him that the signs were located at a residence at 6939
McClure Road in Miller County and that there would be a red
truck parked in front of the house.
police officers who participated in the investigation
testified at trial. One of the officers testified that when
Murphy called to report the stolen signs he mentioned the
name "Mudd," and that the police were familiar with
Mudd from previous encounters.The officer also stated that he
knew Mudd lived at the McClure Road address with his
roommate, Tobey McCarley.
officers went to the residence and found a red truck
belonging to McCarley backed up to the front porch. The
police immediately noticed some old gas and oil signs leaning
against the front porch and partially covered by a tarp. The
police knocked repeatedly on the door but got no answer.
Murphy was called to the scene, and he identified the signs
as belonging to him. Because some of the missing signs were not
found next to the porch, the police obtained a warrant to
search the house for the remaining signs.
the police executed the search warrant, they initially did
not find any occupants. However, one of the officers noticed
someone hiding under the bed in a back bedroom and ordered
him to come out. This person was Mudd, and he came out from
under the bed as directed. The police found a rifle and a
handgun under the bed where Mudd had been hiding. A marijuana
cigarette was found on the nightstand in the bedroom. Mudd
was handcuffed, and he told the police that someone was
hiding under the couch in the living room.
police looked under the living-room couch and found McCarley
hiding there. A small baggie was under the living-room
television and was partially visible. After seeing the
baggie, the police obtained another warrant to search the
residence for narcotics. When executing that search warrant,
the police found syringes in the area where McCarley had been
hiding. On the living-room coffee table were marijuana pipes,
rolling papers, and a spoon containing a white residue. The
baggie that was under the television was sent to the crime
lab and was found to contain 0.7 grams of methamphetamine.
The police did not find any additional stolen signs inside
the police officers testified that there were surveillance
cameras outside the residence. The police cars parked in
front of the residence were being live-streamed on the
officers did not find any mail, utility bills, or any other
items containing Mudd's name in the residence. The police
did, however, find some work shirts bearing McCarley's
only argument on appeal is that there was insufficient
evidence to support his convictions for theft by receiving,
possession of methamphetamine, and possession of drug
paraphernalia with the purpose to inject, ingest, or inhale
methamphetamine. Specifically, Mudd contends that the State
failed to prove he ...