 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Mosley v. State10/13/2004
t the State failed to present evidence that he operated the vehicle, and that Noles testified that she was the driver of the vehicle. A motion for a directed verdict is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. Walley v. State, 353 Ark. 586, 112 S.W.3d 349 (2003). However, we decline to address Mosley's argument on appeal because it is not preserved. He failed to move for directed verdict at the close of all evidence pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 33.1 (2004). See, e.g., Raymond v. State, 354 Ark. 157, 118 S.W.3d 567 (2003) (holding that a directed verdict motion made after the close of all evidence, but during closing statements, is not timely, and therefore, does not preserve a sufficiency challenge on appeal).
Affirmed.
Griffen and Neal, JJ., agree.
Page 1 2 3 Arkansas DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|