Devalin Wiseman v. State of Arkansas

Cite as 2024 Ark. App. 305
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II
No. CR-23-196

Opinion Delivered May 8, 2024

DEVALIN WISEMAN APPEAL FROM THE HOWARD COUNTY
APPELLANT CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. 31CR-21-101]
V.
HONORABLE BRYAN L. CHESSHIR,
JUDGE
STATE OF ARKANSAS
APPELLEE AFFIRMED

KENNETH S. HIXSON, Judge

Appellant Devalin Wiseman was convicted in a jury trial of first-degree murder

committed against his three-year-old son, MC. For this conviction, Wiseman was sentenced

to thirty years in prison. Wiseman now appeals, and his sole argument is that there was

insufficient evidence to support the verdict. Wiseman specifically argues that there was a

lack of proof that he knowingly caused MC’s death. We affirm.

Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-10-102(a)(3) (Supp. 2023) provides that a person

commits first-degree murder if the person knowingly causes the death of a person fourteen

years of age or younger. “Knowingly” is defined by Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-202(2) (Repl.

2013):

(2) “KNOWINGLY.” A person acts knowingly with respect to:

(A) The person’s conduct or the attendant circumstances when he or she is aware
that his or her conduct is of that nature or that the attendant circumstances exist; or
(B) A result of the person’s conduct when he or she is aware that it is practically
certain that his or her conduct will cause the result[.]

In reviewing a sufficiency challenge, we assess the evidence in the light most favorable

to the State and consider only the evidence that supports the verdict. Armstrong v. State, 2020

Ark. 309, 607 S.W.3d 491. We will affirm a judgment of conviction if substantial evidence

exists to support it. Id. Substantial evidence is evidence that is of sufficient force and

character that it will, with reasonable certainty, compel a conclusion one way or the other

without resorting to speculation or conjecture. Id. Circumstantial evidence may provide a

basis to support a conviction, but it must be consistent with the defendant’s guilt and

inconsistent with any other reasonable conclusion. Collins v. State, 2021 Ark. 35, 617 S.W.3d

701. Whether the evidence excludes every other hypothesis is left to the jury to decide. Id.

Further, the credibility of witnesses is an issue for the jury, not the court; the trier of fact is

free to believe all or part of any witness’s testimony and may resolve questions of conflicting

testimony and inconsistent evidence. Armstrong, supra.

Wiseman lived in Mineral Springs with his girlfriend, Chasity Holmes. Also in the

home were Chasity’s two sons—ages five and four—and Wiseman’s two sons—MC, age three,

and MC’s two-year-old brother. Wiseman had taken custody of his sons from their mother

in Alabama about three months before MC’s death on November 14, 2021.

Chasity testified about the events that occurred on November 14, 2021. They were

at home that morning when Wiseman began to punish MC in the living room after MC had

used the bathroom on himself and MC was cussing. Chasity stated that Wiseman began

2
whipping MC on his behind and back and that Wiseman was using a belt, a long wooden

spoon, and his hand. MC was crying and begging Wiseman to stop. Chasity stated that she

had previously seen Wiseman discipline MC as recently as a week prior, but this time,

Wiseman was more upset, and this was above and beyond anything she had seen before.

Chasity indicated that Wiseman was the only person to discipline MC that day and that he

was constantly hitting MC. Chasity stated that MC was on his stomach and that Wiseman

had his knee in MC’s back, pinning him to the floor. Chasity stated that when Wiseman

had MC on the floor whipping him, she began to feel uncomfortable, and she left the living

room and went to another room with the other children.

Chasity testified that when she first left the living room, MC was still crying.

However, sometime later, it got quiet, and she returned to the living room. Chasity testified

that she saw MC lying motionless on the floor and his breathing was very faint. Chasity tried

to perform CPR on MC and told Wiseman to call for help. Wiseman responded, “Wait,

wait, I can’t go to jail for hurting my baby.” However, Chasity called 911, but because the

ambulance was taking too long, Chasity drove to Howard Memorial Hospital while Wiseman

sat in the backseat with MC, who was wrapped in a blanket.

Deputy Aaron Quick of the Howard County Sheriff’s Department was dispatched to

Wiseman’s home in Mineral Springs but was then rerouted to Howard Memorial Hospital.

Deputy Quick testified that he went to the emergency room and saw several doctors and

nurses “working on a child [MC] who was laying on the bed motionless.” As hospital staff

continued their life-saving measures, Quick took photographs of MC’s observable injuries.

3
Deputy Quick stated that there were severe injuries to MC and that “[he] knew by looking

at the child it would be a major crime against this child so [he] wanted to document it.”

Deputy Quick stated that MC had multiple bruises all over his body, including his legs, arms,

torso, and head. Deputy Quick also observed several lacerations that looked fresh as well as

some that looked older and had “dried up.” Deputy Quick noted that MC never moved nor

spoke and that his eyes were open but he never moved them or blinked. Deputy Quick

testified that after observing and photographing MC’s condition, he “immediately stepped

out of the room and called [his] sheriff and [his] investigators to come to the hospital due to

the severity of the injuries of the child.” MC was transported from Howard Memorial

Hospital to Arkansas Children’s Hospital, where he died later that day.

Chief Deputy Joey Davis conducted two Mirandized interviews with Wiseman that

day, which were recorded and played to the jury. The first interview occurred while MC was

still alive, and the second interview occurred after MC had passed away.

In the first interview, Wiseman stated that he had dropped out of high school in the

eleventh grade but that he had obtained a GED. Wiseman confirmed in the interview that

he understood his rights, and he agreed to give a statement. When asked about the incident

earlier that day involving MC, Wiseman stated that he whipped MC because MC had used

the bathroom on himself and was cussing and being disrespectful. Wiseman stated that he

whipped MC only on his buttocks (although he probably also accidentally hit MC’s back)

and that he used a belt, a wooden spoon, and a white extension cord. In the first interview,

Wiseman denied hitting MC with his hand. Wiseman stated that he whipped MC on and

4
off for thirty minutes that he “did kind of hit him hard,” and that MC fell a couple times.

Wiseman acknowledged in the first interview that he “should have never whipped him.”

After Wiseman gave the first interview, investigators obtained a search warrant and

searched Wiseman’s residence for implements used to carry out the beating. During the

search, investigators found a belt and a broken wooden spoon on the living room coffee

table. The belt was doubled over and broken, and broken pieces of the spoon were also

recovered. Beside the coffee table was an orange extension cord.

After the search and after MC had passed away, Chief Deputy Davis interviewed

Wiseman a second time. During that interview, Wiseman was shown photographs of MC’s

injuries and was told that MC had died. Chief Deputy Davis asked Wiseman how MC got

all the injuries to his head. In his first interview, Wiseman did not acknowledge hitting MC

on his head; however, in the second interview, he admitted he had hit MC with his hand

four times on his head and that he “hit him pretty hard.” Wiseman stated that after the first

two hits to MC’s head, MC was not unconscious but appeared dizzy. In the second interview,

Wiseman stated, “I didn’t mean to go too far with it. I’m sorry, man.”

Dr. Charles Kokes, a medical examiner at the Arkansas State Crime Laboratory,

performed an autopsy on MC and testified for the State. Dr. Kokes documented extensive

injuries to the child and noted that only MC’s lower legs and feet were relatively free of

external injury. Dr. Kokes testified that there were many linear and curved-patterned

contusions and abrasions on MC’s back, buttocks, shoulders, and the back of his thighs that

were indicative of being whipped with a belt and an extension cord. Dr. Kokes also observed

5
similar injuries to MC’s lower neck, chest, and abdomen. Dr. Kokes stated that there was

bruising and abrasions to MC’s right groin and right testicle, that MC’s right arm showed

areas of multiple injuries that were both fresh and healing, and that there were multiple

injuries, both fresh and healing, to MC’s face and the inside of his mouth. Dr. Kokes stated

further that there was a wide area of confluent or total contusion that went from MC’s left

scalp over his left forehead area onto the left side of his cheek and almost down to his jawline.

Dr. Kokes also performed an internal examination that included the dissection of

MC’s internal organs. MC’s internal injuries included a lacerated liver, perforation of the

duodenum, and contusions of the pancreas with corresponding bleeding in the abdominal

cavity. Dr. Kokes testified that the internal examination showed that MC had suffered a

forceful blow to his abdomen and that the mechanism of injury was application of force that

pushed the liver and other internal structures into the spine. Dr. Kokes also noted that there

was scar tissue on MC’s liver that indicated a level of healing anywhere from two weeks to

several months. Dr. Kokes’s internal examination also revealed hemorrhaging around MC’s

brain.

Dr. Kokes reported numerous blunt-force injuries on the skin surfaces of MC’s head,

neck, chest, abdomen, back, upper extremities, buttocks, and thighs. Dr. Kokes further

reported that the extremely visible injuries were associated with massive hemorrhage in the

underlying subcutaneous soft tissues. Dr. Kokes reported that the appearance of the injuries,

their anatomic locations, and their severity left no doubt that they were sustained as a result

of deliberate infliction. Dr. Kokes determined that MC died from multiple blunt-force

6
injuries and that the manner of death was a homicide. He also testified that MC’s injuries

were “completely inconsistent with any reasonable accidental scenario or situation.”

On the evidence presented, the jury convicted Wiseman of first-degree murder based

on its finding that Wiseman knowingly caused MC’s death. Wiseman now appeals.

Wiseman’s sole argument on appeal is that there was insufficient evidence to support

his first-degree-murder conviction. Wiseman specifically argues that there was a lack of proof

that he knowingly caused MC’s death.1 Wiseman asserts that it was not enough for the State

to show that Wiseman knowingly whipped MC, nor was it enough for the State to show that

Wiseman caused MC’s death. Instead, Wiseman argues, the State was required to prove that

he—a high-school dropout—was aware or practically certain that his whipping of MC would

cause MC to die, and he submits that element of proof was missing. In support of this

contention, Wiseman notes that when MC became unresponsive on the day of the beating,

Wiseman exclaimed, “My baby can’t die,” and when investigators told Wiseman that MC

had died during the second custodial interview, Wiseman insisted they were lying. Wiseman

contends that in light of the evidence presented, the jury had to resort to speculation and

conjecture to find that Wiseman knowingly caused MC’s death.

1
As support for his argument, Wiseman cites Ackers v. State, 73 Ark. 262, 83 S.W. 909
(1904), where Ackers’ second-degree-murder conviction for killing his daughter by excessive
whipping was reversed and remanded. However, Ackers did not involve a challenge to the
sufficiency of the evidence supporting the conviction, and that case was reversed and
remanded for a new trial due to the erroneous admission of prior bad acts and the failure to
give a jury instruction based on a statute that no longer exists. Thus, Ackers is inapplicable.

7
In his argument, Wiseman further asserts that according to Dr. Kokes’s testimony,

some of MC’s internal injuries occurred between two weeks and no more than several

months prior to MC’s death. Wiseman contends that there was no direct evidence as to

how MC received these internal injuries and suggests that they may have been caused when

MC was living with his mother in Alabama.2 For the following reasons, we disagree with

Wiseman’s sufficiency challenge and conclude that there was substantial evidence to support

the jury’s verdict.

This court has noted that a criminal defendant’s intent or state of mind is seldom

apparent. Benton v. State, 2020 Ark. App. 223, 599 S.W.3d 353. One’s intent or purpose,

being a state of mind, can seldom be positively known to others, so it ordinarily cannot be

shown by direct evidence but may be inferred from the facts and circumstances. Id. Because

intent cannot be proved by direct evidence, the fact-finder is allowed to draw on common

knowledge and experience to infer it from the circumstances. Id. Because of the difficulty

in ascertaining a defendant’s intent or state of mind, a presumption exists that a person

intends the natural and probable consequences of his or her acts. Id. Additionally, the

supreme court has held that circumstantial evidence supports a conviction if it is consistent

with the defendant’s guilt and inconsistent with any other reasonable conclusion and that

this determination is a question of fact for the fact-finder. Baughman v. State, 353 Ark. 1,

110 S.W.3d 740 (2003).

2
Chasity testified that Wiseman took custody of MC from MC’s mother in Alabama
in August 2021, which was about three months prior to MC’s death.

8
Pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-202(2)(B), a person acts knowingly with respect to

a result of the person’s conduct when he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct

will cause the result. On the record, we hold that there was circumstantial evidence from

which the jury could conclude, beyond speculation and conjecture, that Wiseman knowingly

caused MC’s death.

The evidence showed that Wiseman beat MC, who was just three years and two

months old, for a period of thirty minutes until MC lost consciousness, became

unresponsive, and died later that day. By Wiseman’s admission in his custodial interviews,

he administered the beating on MC with a belt, a wooden spoon, and an electrical cord.

Although denying it in the first interview, in the second interview Wiseman admitted that

he had also struck MC with his hand four times on his head. According to Wiseman’s

girlfriend, Wiseman had beaten MC in a similar manner, although not as severely, a week

prior and on other occasions before that. On this occasion, Wiseman’s girlfriend left the

room due to the severity of the beating and the fact that Wiseman had pinned MC face

down on the floor while MC pleaded with his father to stop hitting him. Wiseman, however,

continued to beat MC to the point of unconsciousness and, ultimately, death.

Dr. Kokes testified that MC had suffered numerous internal and external injuries

throughout almost all of his body and that MC’s internal injuries included blunt-force

trauma consistent with the use of a hand that crushed his internal organs into his spine,

lacerated his liver, and caused internal bleeding. Dr. Kokes also documented hemorrhaging

around MC’s brain. Based on his examination of MC and the severity of MC’s injuries, Dr.

9
Kokes stated that there was no doubt these injuries were the result of deliberate infliction

and were completely inconsistent with any reasonable accidental scenario. Dr. Kokes

ultimately determined that MC died from multiple blunt-force injuries and that the manner

of death was a homicide.

This evidence was sufficient to demonstrate that Wiseman knew his conduct was of

a deadly nature, and he was aware that it was practically certain that repeated blunt-force

trauma to a three-year-old child’s head and torso would result in death. See Dulle v. State,

2019 Ark. App. 378, 582 S.W.3d 28 (stating that a person acts knowingly with respect to the

result when he strikes and shakes a child to death); Stegall v. State, 340 Ark. 184, 8 S.W.3d

538 (2000) (holding that appellant acted knowingly based on medical evidence of brain

bleeding, bleeding in the eyes, fractures, and older injuries of the child that could not be

caused by accidental trauma but were caused by shaking and slamming the child). Because

we hold that substantial evidence supports the jury’s finding that Wiseman knowingly caused

MC’s death, Wiseman’s conviction for first-degree murder is affirmed.

Affirmed.

WOOD and BROWN, JJ., agree.

Matt Kezhaya and Sonia Kezhaya, for appellant.

Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Kent G. Holt, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.

10