ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
JOHN MAUZY PITTMAN, CHIEF JUDGE
DENNIS WAYNE COOPER
STATE OF ARKANSAS
December 6, 2006
APPEAL FROM THE COLUMBIA
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
HON. LARRY CHANDLER,
The appellant was charged with commercial burglary and theft of property under
$500. After a bench trial, appellant was found guilty of these offenses and sentenced to eight
years in the Arkansas Department of Correction. On appeal, he argues that the trial court
erred in denying his motion for a directed verdict on the charge of commercial burglary. We
A person commits commercial burglary if he enters or remains unlawfully in a
commercial occupiable structure of another with the purpose of committing therein any
“Imprisonment” includes incarceration in a detention facility operated by the state
or any of its political subdivisions. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-101(4)(A)(i) (Repl. 2006).
Entry with purpose to commit petit theft thus suffices to create liability. See Original
Commentary to Ark. Code Ann. § 5-39-201; see also Brown v. State, 12 Ark. App. 132,
671 S.W.2d 228 (1984).
offense punishable by imprisonment. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-39-201(b)(1) (Repl. 2006). A
person commits theft of property if he knowingly takes or exercises unauthorized control
over the property of another person with the purpose of depriving the owner thereof. Ark.
Code Ann. § 5-36-103(a)(1) (Repl. 2006).
A motion for a directed verdict is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence.
Woolbright v. State, 357 Ark. 63, 160 S.W.3d 315 (2004). In determining the sufficiency of
the evidence, we review the evidence in the light most favorable to the appellee, considering
only the evidence that supports the verdict, and we affirm if the verdict is supported by
substantial evidence, direct or circumstantial. Pinder v. State, 357 Ark. 275, 166 S.W.3d 49
(2004). Substantial evidence is evidence forceful enough to compel