Case Law Sherril v. State

Sherril v. State

Document Cited Authorities (6) Cited in (13) Related

David L. Dunagin, Fort Smith, for appellant.

Dustin McDaniel, Att'y Gen., by: Brad Newman, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.

Opinion

KENNETH S. HIXSON, Judge.

On June 7, 2010, appellant Verlin Sherril received a ten-year suspended imposition of sentence after pleading guilty to second-degree forgery. The conditions of the suspended sentence required Mr. Sherril to pay $3500 in restitution at a rate of $50 per month, and also prohibited him from violating any state law. On May 28, 2013, the State filed a petition to revoke appellant's suspended sentence, alleging that he failed to pay restitution as ordered and committed the offense of first-degree battery. After a hearing, the trial court entered an order on July 15, 2013, revoking appellant's suspension and sentencing him to six years in prison followed by a four-year suspended imposition of sentence. Mr. Sherril now appeals from his revocation, and we affirm.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and Rule 4–3(k)(1) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court, appellant's counsel has filed a motion to withdraw on the grounds that the appeal is wholly without merit. Mr. Sherril's counsel's motion was accompanied by a brief discussing all matters in the record that might arguably support an appeal, including any objections and motions made by appellant and denied by the trial court, and a statement of the reason each point raised cannot arguably support an appeal. Mr. Sherril was provided with a copy of his counsel's brief and notified of his right to file pro se points for reversal, and he has submitted a list of pro se points.

At the revocation hearing, the State introduced a ledger sheet showing that Mr. Sherril was significantly behind on his restitution payments. In his testimony, Mr. Sherril acknowledged that he owed restitution and that he had failed to make some of the payments.

The State also elicited testimony from Braxton Cole, who had been seriously injured by Mr. Sherril on May 16, 2013. On that day, the two men got into an argument outside of Mr. Cole's apartment, and Mr. Sherril stabbed Mr. Cole in the neck with a box cutter. According to Mr. Cole, he did not touch Mr. Sherril prior to being stabbed. As a result of the attack, Mr. Cole spent four days in the hospital and had four surgeries.

Arkansas Code Annotated section 16–93–308(d) (Supp.2013) provides that, if a court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant has inexcusably failed to comply with a condition of his suspension, the court may revoke the suspension at any time prior to the time it expires. Evidence that is insufficient for a criminal conviction may be sufficient for the revocation of a suspended sentence. Williams v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 19, 2014 WL 171829. The State bears the burden of proof, but need only prove that the defendant committed one violation of the conditions. Id. On appeal, the trial court's decision will not be reversed unless it is clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. Cohen v. State, 2013 Ark. App. 652, 2013 WL 5964527. Because the determination of a preponderance of the evidence turns on questions of credibility and weight to be given testimony, we defer to the trial court's superior position. Williams, supra.

In this appeal, Mr. Sherril's counsel accurately asserts that the only adverse ruling was the trial court's decision to revoke appellant's suspended sentence. Appellant's counsel further asserts that there can be no meritorious challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting revocation. The State clearly demonstrated that Mr. Sherril was significantly delinquent in paying his court-ordered...

5 cases
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2016
Alsbrook v. State
"...327 (citing Ark. Code Ann. § 16–93–308(d) (Supp. 2013)).7 Id., 2015 Ark. App. 220, at ¶ 3, 459 S.W.3d at 328 (citing Sherril v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 411, 439 S.W.3d 76 ).8 Reyes v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 55, at ¶ 2, 454 S.W.3d 279, 280 (citing Owens v. State, 2009 Ark. App. 876, at ¶ 6, 372..."
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2015
Humphrey v. State, CR–14–677
"...not make factual determinations, and credibility issues are left within the sound discretion of the trial judge. Sherril v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 411, at 4, 439 S.W.3d 76, 79 ; D.S. v. State, 2013 Ark. App. 528, at 2, 2013 WL 5371881.In sum, we hold that counsel has discussed possible appea..."
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2015
Van Ta v. State
"...Evidence that is insufficient for a criminal conviction may be sufficient for the revocation of a suspended sentence. Sherril v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 411, 439 S.W.3d 76. The State bears the burden of proof, but need only prove that the defendant committed one violation of the conditions. I..."
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2016
Phounsavath v. State
"...that is insufficient for a criminal conviction may be sufficient for the revocation of a suspended sentence. Sherril v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 411, at 2–3, 439 S.W.3d 76, 78. The State bears the burden of proof, but need only prove that the defendant committed one violation of the conditions..."
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2015
Johnson v. State, CR-14-758
"...revoke a suspended sentence, the State need only prove that the defendant committed one violation of the conditions. Sherril v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 411, 439 S.W.3d 76. Because the determination of a preponderance of the evidence turns on questions of credibility and the weight to be given..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2016
Alsbrook v. State
"...327 (citing Ark. Code Ann. § 16–93–308(d) (Supp. 2013)).7 Id., 2015 Ark. App. 220, at ¶ 3, 459 S.W.3d at 328 (citing Sherril v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 411, 439 S.W.3d 76 ).8 Reyes v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 55, at ¶ 2, 454 S.W.3d 279, 280 (citing Owens v. State, 2009 Ark. App. 876, at ¶ 6, 372..."
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2015
Humphrey v. State, CR–14–677
"...not make factual determinations, and credibility issues are left within the sound discretion of the trial judge. Sherril v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 411, at 4, 439 S.W.3d 76, 79 ; D.S. v. State, 2013 Ark. App. 528, at 2, 2013 WL 5371881.In sum, we hold that counsel has discussed possible appea..."
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2015
Van Ta v. State
"...Evidence that is insufficient for a criminal conviction may be sufficient for the revocation of a suspended sentence. Sherril v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 411, 439 S.W.3d 76. The State bears the burden of proof, but need only prove that the defendant committed one violation of the conditions. I..."
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2016
Phounsavath v. State
"...that is insufficient for a criminal conviction may be sufficient for the revocation of a suspended sentence. Sherril v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 411, at 2–3, 439 S.W.3d 76, 78. The State bears the burden of proof, but need only prove that the defendant committed one violation of the conditions..."
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2015
Johnson v. State, CR-14-758
"...revoke a suspended sentence, the State need only prove that the defendant committed one violation of the conditions. Sherril v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 411, 439 S.W.3d 76. Because the determination of a preponderance of the evidence turns on questions of credibility and the weight to be given..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex