ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

PER CURIAM

JANUARY 24, 2002

KATRINA MARTIN

Appellant

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

Appellee

CR 01-83

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, NO. CR 97-49, HONORABLE MARION A. HUMPHREY, JUDGE

AFFIRMED

Appellant was convicted of first-degree battery and sentenced to eight years' imprisonment. The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions in Martin v. State, CACR 99-812 (Ark. App. Mar. 8, 2000). Appellant filed in the trial court a petition for re-sentencing pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 16-90-111(b), alleging further facts going to the sufficiency of the evidence and asking the court to reconsider her sentence because of her personal circumstances. The circuit court denied appellant's petition and from that order comes this appeal. We are precluded from addressing appellant's arguments because they were not raised below.

It is well settled that we will not address arguments raised for the first time on appeal. Miner v. State, 342 Ark. 283, 288, 28 S.W.3d 280, 283 (2000). In appellant's petition, she cites section 16-90-111(b) as a jurisdictional basis for the petition. However, it is not until her appeal that appellant makes a lengthy, legal argument on the statutory construction of section 16-90-111(b). In B.C. v. State, 344 Ark. 385, 391, 40 S.W.3d 315, 319 (2001), the argument made by the appellant on appeal was "materially different" from the one made below; therefore, we declined to consider the new argument raised for the first time on appeal. Because appellant failed to raise the statutory construction claim below, we cannot reach the merits of her arguments.

Affirmed.