ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

JOHN MAUZY PITTMAN, JUDGE

DIVISION I

C. D., A JUVENILE

APPELLANT

V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

APPELLEE

CA01-205

October 10, 2001

APPEAL FROM THE GARLAND COUNTY CHANCERY COURT

[NO. J-2000-558]

HON. VICKI SHAW COOK,

CHANCELLOR

AFFIRMED

The appellant in this case was adjudicated a delinquent juvenile for acting as an accomplice to residential burglary. He argues on appeal that the evidence was insufficient to support the adjudication. We affirm.

In resolving the question of the sufficiency of the evidence in a juvenile delinquency case, the standard of review is the same as in a criminal case: we consider only that evidence tending to support the judgment, and we will affirm if, when viewed in the light most favorable to the State, there is substantial evidence to support the judgment. Pack v. State, 73 Ark. App. 123, 41 S.W.3d 409 (2001); McGill v. State, 60 Ark. App. 246, 962 S.W.2d 382 (1998).

The record shows that appellant was outside a residence in the company of several youths. Two of them entered the residence and began vandalizing it with a baseball bat. There was evidence that appellant entered the residence when he heard the destruction taking place, asking as he did so if his companions were vandalizing the residence without him. There was also testimony that appellant was seen hitting the wall of the residence with a bat.

Pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-403(a) (Repl. 1997), a person is an accomplice of another person in the commission of an offense if, with the purpose of promoting or facilitating the commission of an offense, he: (1) solicits, advises, encourages, or coerces the other person to commit it; or (2) aids, agrees to aid, or attempts to aid the other person in planning or committing it; or (3) having a legal duty to prevent the commission of the offense, fails to make proper effort to do so. We think that the evidence is sufficient to show that appellant encouraged and helped his companions to vandalize the residence, and we hold that the evidence is sufficient to support the adjudication of delinquency.

Affirmed.

Roaf and Hart, JJ., agree.