Background
A Crittenden County jury convicted Randy Medlock of Class B felony theft by receiving, Class C felony theft by receiving, and Class A misdemeanor fleeing. Officers executing a search warrant at Medlock’s property in Edmonson, Arkansas, found a camper reported stolen in Mississippi and an F-150 reported stolen in Memphis. Medlock’s mail, paperwork, and other belongings were inside the vehicles, and surveillance video showed the camper being taken by the F-150 by a person matching Medlock’s description.
Medlock waived counsel and represented himself. During voir dire, he told prospective jurors that he had bought the camper and truck from a pawn shop for $3,600. He later refused to participate further because he believed jurisdiction had not been established and asked to be removed after being warned of the rights he would relinquish. The trial proceeded without him, and he made no directed-verdict motion. The jury imposed twenty years for the Class B felony, ten years for the Class C felony, and thirty days for fleeing; the felony terms were ordered to run consecutively.
The Court’s Holding
The Arkansas Court of Appeals held that Medlock’s sufficiency challenge was not preserved. Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 33.1 required a specific directed-verdict motion at the close of the State’s evidence and again at the close of all evidence. Because Medlock voluntarily left the proceedings and made no such motion, the appellate court had nothing to review on sufficiency.
The court rejected Medlock’s jurisdictional argument because Arkansas circuit courts have subject-matter jurisdiction over criminal-statute violations and personal jurisdiction over people who commit offenses within the county. The stolen camper and truck were held on Medlock’s property in Crittenden County, establishing the circuit court’s jurisdiction.
The court also held that the sentence was not facially illegal. The twenty-year Class B felony sentence and ten-year Class C felony sentence were within their statutory ranges, as was the thirty-day misdemeanor sentence. Although the jury recommended consecutive sentences, the amended sentencing order correctly made the misdemeanor term concurrent with the felony terms as required by Arkansas law. The court therefore affirmed.
Key Takeaways
- A defendant in an Arkansas jury trial waives appellate review of evidentiary sufficiency by failing to make the specific directed-verdict motions required by Rule 33.1.
- A circuit court has criminal subject-matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction when the charged offenses occurred within the county it serves.
- A sentence within the applicable statutory range is generally not facially illegal, and the amended order properly made Medlock’s misdemeanor term concurrent with his felony terms.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that a self-represented defendant’s voluntary withdrawal from trial does not excuse compliance with Arkansas’s preservation rules. Even though sufficiency claims receive priority because of double-jeopardy concerns, the appellate court will not reach the merits without the required directed-verdict motions.
It also illustrates the distinction between a true jurisdictional defect, which may be raised at any time, and an unsuccessful jurisdictional objection where the alleged crimes occurred within the circuit court’s territorial authority.