Legal Opinion

Dixon v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 1, 1993No. CR 92-963PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Robert H. Dudley, Justice.

The jury found appellant guilty of first degree murder. There was substantial circumstantial evidence to prove that he ran over his wife more than twice with his automobile, and there was no reversible trial error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of conviction.

The conviction was based upon circumstantial evidence. The appellant recognizes that circumstantial evidence can constitute substantial evidence, see Hill v. State, 299 Ark. 327, 773 S.W.2d 424 (1989), but questions whether there was substantial evidence of his guilt, and, even if there was substantial…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Wicks v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1980
  2. Richmond v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1990
  3. Walker v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1990
  4. Bennett v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
  5. Hill v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Echols v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1996
  2. Misskelley v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1996
  3. Arthur v. ZearleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
  4. Gregory v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
  5. Webb v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1997

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API