In Brooks v. State, 308 Ark. 660, 827 S.W.2d 119 (1992), there was some question as to whether a knife that was admitted into evidence was the one used in the attack. The appellant relied on the discrepancies in the testimony in arguing that the knife was not relevant. The supreme court disagreed, holding that the instrument used in committing a crime is patently relevant and that it was for the jury to resolve the inconsistencies in the testimony and to decide whether it was the actual knife that had been used.