From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Norful v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Jan 22, 1973
489 S.W.2d 239 (Ark. 1973)

Opinion

No. 5795.

Opinion delivered January 22, 1973

CRIMINAL LAW — IDENTIFICATION — SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE. — Eye witness identification, possession of fruits of the crime within minutes after the robbery, and a signed confession by both appellants held sufficient identification.

Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Fourth Division, Richard B. Adkisson, Judge; affirmed.

John C. Earl, for appellants.

Ray Thornton, Atty. Gen., by: Julie McDonald, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.


Appellants Bobby Earl Norful and Samuel Edward Norful contend that their robbery conviction should be set aside because of lack of identification. There is no merit to this contention. The record shows eye witness identification, possession of the fruits of the crime within minutes after the robbery, and a signed confession by both appellants.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Norful v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Jan 22, 1973
489 S.W.2d 239 (Ark. 1973)
Case details for

Norful v. State

Case Details

Full title:BOBBY EARL NORFUL AND SAMUEL EDWARD NORFUL v. STATE OF ARKANSAS

Court:Supreme Court of Arkansas

Date published: Jan 22, 1973

Citations

489 S.W.2d 239 (Ark. 1973)
489 S.W.2d 239