Hudson v. State

Ruffin, Judge.

Arthur Hudson was convicted of armed robbery and kidnapping. He appeals, asserting several enumerations of error. For reasons discussed below, we affirm.

1. In three enumerations, Hudson challenges the sufficiency of the evidence presented at trial. However, Hudson has failed to include a statement of facts in his brief, as required by Court of Appeals Rule 27 (a) (1), and has failed to cite to, or even mention, any facts in the argument section of his brief, as required by Court of Appeals Rule 27 (c) (3). As we have reiterated time and time again, this Court will not cull the…