Cite as 2024 Ark. App. 421

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION IV

No. CR-24-11

MARK TYSON

APPELLANT

V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS 

APPELLEE

Opinion Delivered September 18, 2024

APPEAL FROM THE ASHLEY

COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT 

[NO. 02CR-20-38]

HONORABLE ROBERT B. GIBSON III, 

JUDGE

AFFIRMED

RAYMOND R. ABRAMSON, Judge

Mark Allen Tyson appeals the Ashley County Circuit Court’s revocation of his 

suspended sentence. On appeal, Tyson argues that the State presented insufficient evidence 

that he violated a condition of his suspended sentence. We affirm. 

On June 5, 2020, Tyson pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance. He was 

sentenced to four months in the community correction facility with an additional thirty-six

months’ suspended sentence. 

On July 17, 2023, the State petitioned to revoke Tyson’s suspended sentence, alleging 

that he committed third-degree domestic battery against Brandie Jackson on June 24, 2023. 

On October 10, the court held a revocation hearing. Officer Derek Hill testified that 

he responded to a domestic-disturbance call at Betty Tyson’s home. He explained that when 

he arrived, he saw Tyson and Brandie yelling, and he saw marks on Brandie’s neck. Officer 
2

Hill testified that he arrested Tyson and that Tyson admitted he had kicked Brandie in her

stomach. 

Betty Tyson testified that she is Tyson’s grandmother and that she called 911 on June 

24, 2023, to report an altercation between Brandie and Tyson. She explained that Tyson

tried to choke Brandie and that he also “jumped” her. She specified that Tyson kicked 

Brandie in her stomach with his boot, knocking Brandie to the ground. She stated that 

Brandie had knots on her forearm and forehead and marks on her neck. On crossexamination, Betty specified that the dispute between Brandie and Tyson lasted for about 

fifteen minutes and that both Brandie and Tyson were hitting each other. 

Brandie testified on Tyson’s behalf and stated that she is in a relationship with Tyson. 

She denied that Tyson had choked or hit her at Betty’s house, and she explained that the 

marks on her neck were from sex. She stated that Betty is confused. 

Tyson testified and denied having physically harmed Brandie. He explained that he 

and Brandie had only a verbal disagreement about her roommates’ stealing items from his 

truck.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the court found that Tyson had violated his 

suspended sentence. The court credited Betty’s testimony, and it found Tyson’s and 

Brandie’s testimony not credible. The court sentenced Tyson to ten years in prison. This 

appeal followed. 

On appeal, Tyson argues that the State presented insufficient evidence that he 

violated a condition of his suspended sentence by committing third-degree domestic battery 
3

against Brandie. He points out that the State did not introduce any exhibits and that the 

court relied only on testimony evidence. He asserts that his and Brandie’s testimony 

contradicts Betty’s testimony.

In a revocation hearing, the State must prove its case by a preponderance of the 

evidence. Ingram v. State, 2009 Ark. App. 729, 363 S.W.3d 6. A circuit court may revoke a 

defendant’s suspended sentence if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the 

defendant has inexcusably failed to comply with a condition of his suspended sentence. Id.

The State bears the burden of proof but need only prove that the defendant committed one 

violation of the conditions. Id.

When appealing a revocation, the appellant has the burden of showing that the circuit 

court’s findings are clearly against a preponderance of the evidence. Id. Evidence that is 

insufficient for a criminal conviction may be sufficient for the revocation of a suspended

sentence. Id. Since the determination of a preponderance of the evidence turns on questions 

of credibility and the weight to be given testimony, we defer to the circuit court’s superior 

position. Id. Inconsistent testimony does not render proof insufficient as a matter of law, 

and one eyewitness’s testimony is sufficient to sustain a conviction. Harmon v. State, 340 Ark. 

18, 8 S.W.3d 472 (2000).

A person commits third-degree domestic battery if with the purpose of causing 

physical injury to a family or household member, the person causes physical injury to a family 

or household member. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-26-305(a)(1) (Supp. 2023). “Physical injury” is 
4

defined in part as the infliction of substantial pain or inflicting bruising, swelling, or a visible 

mark associated with physical trauma. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-1-102(14)(B) & (C) (Supp. 2023). 

In this case, we hold that the circuit court did not err in finding that Tyson violated 

a condition of his suspended sentence by committing third-degree domestic battery. Betty 

testified that Tyson tried to choke Brandie and kicked her in her stomach, knocking her to 

the ground. Officer Hill also testified that Tyson admitted he had kicked Brandie in her

stomach. Moreover, both Officer Hill and Betty testified that Brandie had visible marks and 

knots on her body. The circuit court specifically credited Betty’s testimony over Tyson’s and 

Brandie’s testimony. Credibility determinations are left to the circuit court, and we will not 

reweigh the evidence on appeal. Simmons v. State, 2024 Ark. App. 42, 683 S.W.3d 231. 

Accordingly, we affirm the circuit court’s revocation of Tyson’s suspended sentence. 

Affirmed. 

KLAPPENBACH and BROWN, JJ., agree.

K. “Presley” Hager Turner, for appellant.

Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Kent G. Holt, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.