ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

TERRY CRABTREE, JUDGE

DIVISION III

ANTHONY ARNEZ NELSON

APPELLANT

V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

APPELLEE

CACR 00-1291

NOVEMBER 7,2001

APPEAL FROM THE FAULKNER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

[NO. CR 99-800]

HONORABLE CHARLES EDWARD CLAWSON, JR., JUDGE

AFFIRMED

A jury sitting in the Faulkner County Circuit Court convicted the appellant, Anthony Arnez Nelson, of robbery, terroristic threatening, and fleeing. The trial court sentenced him as an habitual offender to a total of fifty-five years' imprisonment in the Arkansas Department of Correction. On appeal, appellant maintains that the State failed to produce sufficient evidence of his guilt, and that the trial court erred by denying his motions for directed verdict. We affirm.

On November 13, 1999, the manager of a Blockbuster video store, Meredith Spicer, was in the process of closing a register when appellant reached inside the register and stole a stack of twenty-dollar bills. Spicer and another employee told appellant to stop and attempted to block his exit from the store, but appellant pushed them aside and exited

shouting, "[g]et out of the way b----." Spicer followed appellant outside and began to pullon his arm in an attempt to stop his flight when appellant punched her in the face. Still, Spicer continued to pursue appellant to his car where she managed to pry the bills from appellant's hands.

Meanwhile, a customer inside the store, David Holmes, heard a clerk say, "[h]e's robbing us." Holmes proceeded outside the store, saw Spicer's struggle with appellant, and ran to help. Appellant saw Holmes coming toward him and entered his car on the passenger side. In an effort to thwart appellant's attempt to flee, Holmes reached inside to take the keys out of the ignition, at which time appellant asked him if he "wanted to die." Spicer told Holmes to let appellant go and immediately called 911 with a description of appellant and the license-plate number to his car.

Conway patrolman Bobby Harvill received a dispatch concerning the robbery and saw appellant's car driving on a busy downtown street. When Officer Harvill activated his blue lights and siren, appellant drove away at a high rate of speed and proceeded to weave in and out of dense traffic. Appellant ultimately pulled inside a parking lot where he was placed under arrest. One officer who aided in the pursuit of appellant described his driving as "extremely dangerous" with "cars all over the place."

As he did below, appellant asserts that the State failed to produce sufficient evidence of his guilt, and that the trial court erred by denying his motions for directed verdict. Directed-verdict motions are treated as challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence. Blockman v. State, 69 Ark. App. 192, 11 S.W.3d 562 (2000). When the sufficiency of the evidence is challenged, the appellate court considers only evidence that supports the guiltyverdict, and the test is whether there is substantial evidence to support the verdict. Id. Substantial evidence is evidence of such certainty and precision as to compel a conclusion one way or another. Id.

Appellant's argument is not preserved for appeal. Here, appellant failed to abstract the renewal of his directed-verdict motion, which standing alone, is adequate reason to bar his sufficiency claim. See Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(6) (2001); Moncrief v. State, 325 Ark. 173, 925 S.W.2d 777 (1996). Furthermore, appellant failed to abstract the trial court's ruling on the renewal of his directed-verdict motion. Therefore, appellant's claims are barred, and accordingly we affirm.

Robbins and Neal, JJ., agree.