Page v. State

687 S.W.3d 856

2024 Ark. App. 259

Raymond PAGE, Appellant

v.STATE of Arkansas, Appellee

No. CR-23-492

Court of Appeals of Arkansas, DIVISION II.

Opinion Delivered April 17, 2024

APPEAL FROM THE SALINE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 63CR-20-563], HONORABLE JOSH FARMER, JUDGE

Jones Law Firm, by: F. Parker Jones III, for appellant.

One brief only.

WENDY SCHOLTENS WOOD, Judge

₁Raymond Page appeals the Saline County Circuit Court’s sentencing order revoking his probation and sentencing him to ten years’ imprisonment. Pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(b) and Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Page’s counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, stating that there is no merit to an appeal.¹ The motion is accompanied by a brief in which counsel explains why there is nothing in the record that would support an appeal. The clerk of this court served Page with a copy of counsel’s brief and notified him of his right to file a pro se statement of points for reversal within thirty days, but he has not done so. We affirm the revocation and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

₂On November 8, 2021, Page pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance, a Class D felony, and failure to appear, a Class C felony. In an order entered on November 15, the circuit court sentenced him to concurrent terms of five years’ probation. The State filed a petition to revoke his probation on May 3, 2022, and an amended petition to revoke his probation on March 14, 2023. In its amended petition, the State alleged that Page had failed to report as directed; tested positive for methamphetamine, amphetamine, and THC; and committed the new offenses of possession of controlled substances and possession of drug paraphernalia.

On March 30, the circuit court held a revocation hearing. The only witness was Page’s probation officer, Richard Perry. At the conclusion of the hearing, the circuit court found that Page had violated the terms and conditions of his probation and, in an order entered on April 20, sentenced him to six years’ imprisonment for possession of a controlled substance and ten years’ imprisonment for failure to appear, to run concurrently.

Rule 4-3(b)(1) provides that a no-merit brief shall contain an argument section that consists of a list of all rulings adverse to the defendant made by the circuit court on all objections, motions, and requests made by either party with an explanation as to why each adverse ruling is not a meritorious ground for reversal. The briefs statement of the ease and the facts shall contain, in addition to the other material parts of the record, all rulings adverse to the defendant made by the circuit court and the page number where each adverse ruling is located in the appellate record. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(b)(1) (2023).

[1–4] ₃Page’s counsel has briefed the court on all three adverse rulings in the case. The first is the circuit court’s revoca- tion of Page’s probation. To revoke a defendant’s probation, the circuit court must find by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant has inexcusably violated a condition of his or her probation. McDougal v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 212, at 4, 465 S.W.3d 863, 865. The State bears the burden of proof but need only prove one violation. Peals v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 1, at 4, 453 S.W.3d 151, 154. Officer Perry’s undisputed testimony was that Page twice absconded from supervision and failed to report—once for four months—in violation of the condition requiring him to report as directed to his supervising officer. Officer Perry also testified that Page tested positive for methamphetamine and amphetamine on April 25, May 2, May 27, and June 6, 2022, in violation of the condition forbidding him from using, selling, distributing, or possessing any controlled substance. We hold there would be no merit to an appeal of the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the revocation.

[5–7] Counsel also addresses the circuit court’s denial of Page’s request for a continuance to allow him to obtain a private attorney and explains why it would not be a meritorious ground for reversal on appeal. We review the denial of a motion for...