State of Arkansas, Appellant v. Billy Gene Coble, Appellee

Summary

The court held that the State’s appeal was properly within its criminal appellate jurisdiction because it presented a narrow, broadly applicable question of statutory interpretation. It affirmed the directed verdict, concluding that “another person” in the sexual-indecency statute means someone other than the actor and therefore the statute did not cover exposure directed solely to the guardian. Justice Danielson, dissenting, would have interpreted “another person” to include the perpetrator and would have declared error in the directed verdict.