Winston v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Tom Glaze, Justice.
Tywan Winston appeals his capital-murder conviction following a jury trial in the Pulaski County Circuit Court. Winston’s only point for reversal is that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a directed verdict, arguing that the State provided insufficient evidence to support his conviction. We find no error and affirm.
An appeal from a denial of a motion for a directed verdict is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. Woolbright v. State, 357 Ark. 63, 160 S.W.3d 315 (2004). Reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, this court determines…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Fudge v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
- Doss v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2003
- Clem v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2002
- McFarland v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
- Woolbright v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Green v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2013
- Jackson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2009
- Marcyniuk v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2010
- Stephenson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2008
- Friar v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2016
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.