Court Opinion

ID: 9364093
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-18 15:01:54.416514+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:35.799906
License: Public Domain

Cite as 2023 Ark. App. 15
                     ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
                                          DIVISION II
                                          No. CR-22-406

                                                   Opinion Delivered January   18, 2023
TODD MICHAEL WINTERS
                                  APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE BRADLEY
                                            COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
V.                                          [NO. 06CR-17-69]

STATE OF ARKANSAS                            HONORABLE CREWS PURYEAR,
                                    APPELLEE JUDGE

                                                   AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW
                                                   GRANTED

                                    MIKE MURPHY, Judge

        The Bradley County Circuit Court revoked Todd Winters’s suspended imposition of

 sentence and sentenced him to three years’ imprisonment. Pursuant to Arkansas Supreme

 Court Rule 4-3(k) and Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), appellant’s counsel has filed

 a motion to withdraw stating that there is no merit to an appeal. 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 appellant 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.

        Appellant Todd Winters entered a plea of guilty to commercial burglary and theft of

 property as reflected in a sentencing order entered on March 5, 2018. He was sentenced to
six years of probation, but he later violated that probation and was resentenced to two years

in the community corrections center and four years’ suspended imposition of sentence.

       On July 12, 2020, the State filed a petition to revoke appellant’s suspended sentence

alleging that he had violated the conditions thereof by obtaining new charges, including

assault on a family member, two counts of third-degree battery, and third-degree assault. A

revocation hearing was held on May 3, 2021. The State presented no witnesses but entered

certified copies of convictions for assault and battery without objection. Winters called two

witnesses. The first witness was his brother, who said that he had helped Winters get a job

and he has witnessed Winters making progress in his anger management. He said sending

Winters back to prison would be a setback. The second witness was a caseworker advocate

with Immerse Arkansas. She stated that she had been working with Winters helping him

apply for jobs, apply for benefits, and enroll in barber school. After hearing the evidence, the

court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Winters had violated the terms and

conditions of his probation. Instead of sentencing Winters, however, the court held the

sentence in abeyance to allow Winters to take anger-management counseling. It set the

sentencing hearing four months out and left the record open.

       Winters failed to appear at the September 8 hearing. It was rescheduled to December

6. At the December 6 hearing, Winters testified he had completed anger-management

counseling but could not provide proof and that he had missed his last court date because

he had been walking to court. On cross-examination, he admitted that his brother’s girlfriend

accused him of chasing her with a knife; that he had pleaded guilty to third-degree assault

                                               2
on July 1, 2020; and that he had pleaded guilty to two counts of third-degree battery and

assault on a family member on March 17, 2021. The court sentenced Winters to three years

in the Arkansas Department of Correction.

       In a no-merit brief, counsel is required to list each ruling adverse to the defendant

and explain why it does not present a meritorious ground for reversal. Eads v. State, 74 Ark.

App. 363, 365, 47 S.W.3d 918, 919 (2001). After a full examination of the proceedings, we

are required to determine whether an appeal would be wholly frivolous. Tennant v. State,

2014 Ark. App. 403, at 2, 439 S.W.3d 61, 63. Counsel identifies two rulings adverse to

appellant in addition to the revocation decision. Counsel has addressed each adverse ruling,

arguing that the rulings do not have merit and that evidence supported the circuit court’s

decision to revoke Winters’s suspended imposition of sentence. We agree.

       We first address whether the evidence was sufficient to support the revocation. To

revoke probation, the State must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the

defendant violated a condition of his or her suspended imposition of sentence. Green v. State,

2010 Ark. App. 174, at 4. The State needs to prove only one violation. Peals v. State, 2015

Ark. App. 1, at 4, 453 S.W.3d 151, 154. Here, the undisputed evidence was that Winters

obtained new charges while serving a suspended imposition of sentence, in violation of those

terms. We hold that there would be no merit to an appeal of the sufficiency of the evidence

supporting the revocation.

       Nor did the court err in making the two additional adverse rulings against the

appellant. The first was a motion to continue to produce a certain witness whom defense

                                              3
counsel thought the State was going to produce. The defense had not issued its own

subpoena for the witness, and it was not erroneous for the court to deny the continuance.

See Staggs v. State, 2021 Ark. App. 259, at 9 (“A lack of diligence alone is a sufficient basis to

deny a motion for continuance.”). The second was a request by Winters to be sentenced to

rehab instead of prison, but because his sentence was within the statutory range of

punishment, the sentence was not an abuse of the court’s discretion. Pettigrew v. State, 2019

Ark. App. 420. We affirm.

       Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted.

       GRUBER and BARRETT, JJ., agree.

       Potts Law Office, by: Gary W. Potts, for appellant.

       One brief only.

                                                4