The opinion
Cite as 2025 Ark. App. 508
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II
No. CR-24-825
TOMMIE LEE GLASPIE Opinion Delivered October 29, 2025
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
V. [NO. 60CR-23-3017]
STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE KAREN D.
APPELLEE WHATLEY, JUDGE
AFFIRMED
BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge
After a bench trial, Tommie Lee Glaspie, a felon and habitual offender, appeals the
sufficiency of evidence for his conviction of stealing a .38-caliber Smith & Wesson
Airweight revolver. 1 The gun belonged to Steve Carpenter. It is called an “Airweight,”
he said, because the alloy it is made of weighs half as much as steel. It proved easy to lift.
In August 2022, Glaspie had been working for Carpenter at his farm near Batesville
for about a month. August 3, Carpenter needed to pick up some excavator parts in Little
Rock. Glaspie’s late mother had lived there, and he hadn’t been by her house in a while.
Carpenter agreed to take him. They embarked in Carpenter’s pickup truck: Carpenter,
Glaspie, and—in the console—the Airweight revolver.
1
Ark. Code Ann. § 5-36-103(a)(1) & (b)(3)(B) (Supp. 2021) (theft of property valued
less than $2,500). Glaspie was also convicted of unlawfully possessing a firearm under Ark.
Code Ann. § 5-73-103(a)(1) & (c)(2) (Supp. 2021). He does not appeal that conviction.
When the pair got to Glaspie’s mother’s house, Glaspie went to talk to some friends.
Carpenter followed partway. He noticed Glaspie had the gun in his pocket. Carpenter
said, “Is that my pistol? What are you doing with it? Put it back in my truck.” Glaspie
said he was going to show it to his friends. But he returned to the truck briefly—to return
the gun, Carpenter assumed. Carpenter walked back to the truck and stayed there. He has
not seen the gun since.
On review for sufficiency of evidence to convict, we ask whether substantial
evidence—direct, circumstantial, or both—supports the verdict. Jones v. State, 2023 Ark.
189, 678 S.W.3d 778; Baltimore v. State, 2017 Ark. App. 622, 535 S.W.3d 286. Substantial
evidence has sufficient force and character that it will compel a conclusion without resort
to speculation or conjecture. Ables v. State, 2024 Ark. App. 558, 700 S.W.3d 517. We
consider only the evidence that supports the conviction. Puckett v. State, 2025 Ark. App.
101. Here, convicting Glaspie of theft of property required finding that he knowingly took
or exercised unauthorized control over Carpenter’s property with the purpose of depriving
him of it. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-36-103(a)(1).
There was conflicting testimony on some points that we disregard in this setting,
Puckett, supra, but Carpenter’s testimony met the offense elements without the need to add
speculation or conjecture. Glaspie had not asked to take the gun in the first place and had
gotten into the console to find it. Carpenter was emphatic that in Little Rock, Glaspie “was
the only person who touched that gun, and there was no other person around [his] truck.”
They drove back to Batesville alone and Carpenter dropped Glaspie off at his car. He drove
home and locked the truck. No one else had access between when he locked it and when
2
he realized the gun was missing. Glaspie showed up to work the next morning but left with
some Little Rock friends. They were acting funny, Carpenter said, and “everybody was in
a hurry to get out of there.” He had not seen Glaspie since. End of story: the circuit court
had sufficient evidence before it to support the conviction.
Affirmed.
KLAPPENBACH, C.J., and BROWN, J., agree.
Dusti Standridge, for appellant.
Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Walker K. Hawkins, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.
3