Mitchell v. State, CR-22-21

2022 Ark. App. 424

653 S.W.3d 550

Stacy Anthony MITCHELL, Appellant

v.STATE of Arkansas, Appellee

No. CR-22-21

Court of Appeals of Arkansas, DIVISION I.

Opinion Delivered October 26, 2022

James Law Firm, by: William O. "Bill" James, Jr., and Scott J. Kadien, for appellant.

Leslie Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: Michael Zanzari, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.

PHILLIP T. WHITEAKER, Judge

Appellant Stacy Mitchell was convicted by a Benton County jury of one count of first-degree battery¹ and sentenced to a total of twenty-one years in the Arkansas Department of Correction as a habitual offender. On appeal, Mitchell argues that the circuit court erred when it denied his motion for substitution of counsel. In addition, he argues that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction for first-degree battery. We affirm.

I. Sufficiency of the Evidence

Although Mitchell challenges the sufficiency of the evidence in his second point on appeal, double-jeopardy considerations require this court to consider it first. See Keys v. State , 021 Ark. App. 469, at 6, 636 S.W.3d 835, 839 (citing Taffner v. State , 2018 Ark. 99, 541 S.W.3d 430 ). When we consider a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and consider only the evidence supporting it. Adkins v. State , 371 Ark. 159, 264 S.W.3d 523 (2007). We will affirm if the finding of guilt is supported by substantial evidence. King v. State , 2021 Ark. App. 339. Substantial evidence is evidence of such sufficient force and character that it will, with reasonable certainty, compel a conclusion one way or the other without resorting to speculation or conjecture. Fernandez v. State , 2010 Ark. 148, 362 S.W.3d 905. In reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we do not reweigh the evidence or assess the credibility of the witnesses. Turner v. State , 2019 Ark. App. 476, at 5, 588 S.W.3d 375, 378. It is the jury's role as the finder of fact to resolve questions of inconsistent evidence and conflicting testimony, and the jury is free to believe the State's version of the facts over the defendant's account. Id.

Mitchell was convicted of first-degree battery. A person commits first-degree battery if, with the purpose of causing serious physical injury to another person, the person causes serious physical injury to any person by means of a deadly weapon or causes serious physical injury to another person under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-13-201(a)(1) & (3) (Supp. 2019). A "deadly weapon" includes "anything that in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of causing death or serious physical injury." Ark. Code Ann. § 5-1-102(4)(B) (Repl. 2013). "Serious physical injury" means "physical injury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes protracted disfigurement, protracted impairment of health, or loss or protracted impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ." Ark. Code Ann. § 5-1-102(21). We now turn our attention to the facts introduced at trial, viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to the State.

On the evening of February 2, 2019, Chelsea Roberts and some friends, including Lauren Patanus, Kent Fisher, and Christian McKinnis, were socializing on the back patio of JJ's Bar and Grill in Rogers. They were approached by appellant Mitchell, who started making vulgar comments to Roberts. Fisher intervened and asked Mitchell to stop, which led to an exchange of words between Fisher and Mitchell, and the exchange of words led to a fight between them. A JJ's employee removed Mitchell from the patio and escorted him out through the front of the building.

After Mitchell had been escorted through the front of the building, Roberts and her friends decided to exit through a side door to avoid him. This was unsuccessful. Outside the building, Mitchell once again approached them. Fisher saw Mitchell pull a knife out of his pocket, flip it open, and "[take] off at a dead sprint" toward the group. Fisher alerted the others and told them to run. They attempted to reenter the building but could not because the door would not open from the outside.

Mark McCoy, another JJ's patron, heard Fisher and McKinnis screaming at him to open the patio gate. He opened the door, and McKinnis held the door open while Fisher ran inside and told the bouncer to call 911. As he was holding the door, McKinnis attempted to calm Mitchell down, and McCoy went outside to assist. McCoy tried to calm Mitchell down and asked him to leave. During this exchange, Mitchell cut McCoy's wrist with the knife.²

Concerning the nature and extent of McCoy's injury, the jury heard evidence that the cut on McCoy's arm wrapped around his left wrist from the middle to the right and caused a "significant amount" of bleeding. He was taken to the emergency room for treatment, where Tyler McGinty, a physician's assistant, treated McCoy for a four-centimeter-long laceration to his skin and another laceration to the underlying fascia. McGinty put two sutures into the fascia and a separate row of sutures into his skin. McCoy did not sustain any long-term indication of nerve or vascular injury, but he did complain of numbness and joint pain in the area. As a result of the wound, McCoy has scarring on his left arm. He testified that as a golf professional, he had to relearn the feel of his grip. He experienced numbness in his pinky, which impacted everything from typing on a keyboard to getting dressed.

On appeal, Mitchell argues that this evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction for first-degree battery. He first notes that McCoy did not testify what sort of object hit him. The jury, however, heard evidence that Mitchell pulled a knife from his pocket and flipped it open. Moreover, McCoy testified that he felt himself "bumped from the back, [and] my arm gets just nailed, just hit by an object."

Next, Mitchell argues that McCoy did not sustain a "serious physical injury" as defined by section 5-13-201. Citing the medical evidence, Mitchell points out that the injury was a four-centimeter-long laceration that "only needed sutures to repair." He contends that McCoy did not testify about the type of medical treatment he received, did not testify that he sustained any injury to any part of his body other than his wrist, and complained only of pain and numbness around the wound.

Mitchell's argument is not well taken. Whether a victim has sustained serious physical injury as well as the question of temporary or protracted impairment are issues for the jury to decide. Bangs v. State , 338 Ark. 515, 998 S.W.2d 738 (1999). In determining whether a physical injury exists, a jury may consider the severity of the attack and may rely on its common knowledge, experiences, and observations in life to make this determination. Chambers v. State , 2020 Ark. App. 54, 595 S.W.3d 371 ; Linn v. State , 84 Ark. App. 141, 133 S.W.3d 407 (2003). It is not necessary that the impairment be permanent, but only protracted, Bell v. State , 99 Ark. App. 300, 259 S.W.3d 472 (2007), and the fact that the victim ultimately recovers has no bearing on whether the injury sustained is serious. Brown v. State , 347 Ark. 308, 65 S.W.3d 394 (2001). Moreover, expert medical testimony is not required to prove serious physical injury. Johnson v. State , 2017 Ark. App. 71, 510 S.W.3d 298.

Here, the jury heard evidence as set forth above that supports its finding that Mitchell committed the offense of first-degree battery. McCoy suffered a cutting wound to his arm deep enough to require multiple sutures to close and that resulted in a scar and caused McCoy to continue to experience numbness in the area two years later. In Bangs , supra , the supreme court affirmed a first-degree-battery conviction when the victim sustained five-centimeter lacerations to her skull that required staples to close. In Huggins v. State , 2021 Ark. App. 74, 618 S.W.3d 187, this court affirmed a first-degree-battery conviction when the defendant hit the victim with a glass bottle that shattered; the victim required multiple stitches to close the wound, and was left with a scar that ran from her elbow down her forearm. The jury, sitting as trier of fact and using its common knowledge, was able to see McCoy's injuries and determined that he sustained a serious physical injury when Mitchell cut his wrist with a knife. We therefore hold that there was substantial evidence of serious physical injury and affirm Mitchell's conviction for first-degree battery.

II. Motion for Substitution of Counsel

In what is actually his first point on appeal, Mitchell argues that it was erroneous for the circuit court to deny his motion for substitution of counsel. A circuit court's ruling on a defendant's request for substitution of counsel is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. See, e.g. , Conic v. State , 2021 Ark. App. 185, 624 S.W.3d 322. Abuse of discretion is a high threshold that does not simply require error in the circuit court's decision but requires that the circuit court act improvidently, thoughtlessly, or without due consideration. Hopkins v. State , 2017 Ark. App. 273, 522 S.W.3d 142. In addressing this argument, we will make a careful examination of the proceedings and hearings that occurred before Mitchell's jury trial.

Shortly after the incident involving McCoy, Mitchell was arrested but released from custody. He appeared pro se in the Benton County Circuit Court on March 11, 2019, and asked if there was any way he could get a public defender. The court agreed and directed him to have either a private attorney or a public defender at his next hearing as a condition of release. On July 8,³ Mitchell was arraigned and filled out an affidavit of indigency. The court found him to be partially indigent and appointed a public defender, Sam Hall. Mitchell then pled not guilty, and the court set an omnibus hearing for August 12....