Court Opinion

ID: 9960815
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-17 14:02:57.274308+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:19:54.654816
License: Public Domain

Cite as 2024 Ark. App. 266
                   ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
                                       DIVISION II
                                       No. CR-23-510

 JIMMY WOODARD                                  Opinion Delivered April 17, 2024
                               APPELLANT
                                                APPEAL FROM THE CRAIGHEAD
                                                COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
 V.                                             WESTERN DISTRICT
                                                [NO. 16JCR-18-951]
 STATE OF ARKANSAS
                                 APPELLEE HONORABLE CHRIS THYER, JUDGE

                                                AFFIRMED

                            WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge

       Appellant Jimmy Woodard appeals from the order of the Craighead County Circuit

Court revoking his suspended imposition of sentence (SIS) for the underlying charge of

possession of a controlled substance—methamphetamine. He argues that the circuit court

erred by revoking his SIS because the State failed to prove that he was in sole possession of

the contraband found in subsequent arrests. We affirm.1

       Appellant pled guilty in August 2019 to possessing less than two grams of

methamphetamine. He was charged as a habitual offender and faced up to fifteen years’

imprisonment.    His sentence was deferred until he either successfully completed the

Craighead County drug-court program or was terminated from the drug-court program. As

       1
         This is a companion case to another case also handed down today. See Woodard v.
State, 2024 Ark. App. 267.
a condition of the program, appellant was required to obey all laws, and he was put on notice

that any new criminal acts may be prosecuted. The State filed a petition to impose sentence

on October 6, 2020, alleging that appellant was in violation of the drug-court program by

possessing controlled substances and failing to pay fines and court fees. In the October 22

sentencing order, appellant was sentenced to two years at the Community Correction Center

followed by five years’ SIS. Appellant was required to pay a fee of $665 at the rate of $50 a

month after his release.

       The State filed a petition for revocation on November 29, 2022, contending that

appellant had violated the terms and conditions of his SIS on November 13 by possessing

more than two but less than ten grams of methamphetamine, by tampering with physical

evidence, and by possessing drug paraphernalia. The petition was supplemented on February

1, 2023, to include a January 14 arrest for possession of less than two grams of

methamphetamine.

       The revocation hearing took place on April 6. Officer Trevor Sutton of the Jonesboro

Police Department (JPD) testified that he was working patrol on November 13, 2022, when

he made a traffic stop on a vehicle being driven by appellant for a cracked windshield. He

stated that he made appellant step out of the vehicle when he finally stopped because

appellant had passed several places where he could have pulled over but, instead, traveled to

the McDonald’s parking lot before stopping. He said that this made him think appellant

was attempting to hide something. Officer Sutton testified that appellant denied being on

probation or parole, but a call to dispatch revealed that appellant was on SIS. Appellant was

                                             2
searched, and a K9 officer was called to do a sniff of the vehicle. The K9 alerted, and Officer

Sutton subsequently searched the vehicle and found a methamphetamine pipe. He testified

that it was a glass pipe with burnt crystal residue inside it. Nothing else was found in the

vehicle appellant was driving.

       On cross-examination, Officer Sutton stated that appellant’s delay in pulling over

gave him reasonable suspicion that appellant was trying to hide something. He agreed that

appellant was cooperative once he was pulled over.

       On redirect, Officer Sutton testified that once he transported appellant to the county

jail, he located a bag of methamphetamine on the floorboard of his vehicle that had

somehow been dropped there by appellant. He said that he knew the methamphetamine

belonged to appellant because it was not on the floorboard when appellant was placed in the

vehicle. He further testified that

       [i]t’s department policy that you search the backseat of your car. My car, actually has
       plastic seats and a floorboard that cannot go anywhere else. So there’s no -- no crevices
       for anything to be hidden or lost inside of it. So the floorboard, once you look at it
       there’s [nowhere] that it could have slid out of or been from previous arrestees.

He testified that once he removed appellant from his vehicle to take him into the sallyport,

he noticed the bag of methamphetamine in the floorboard where appellant was sitting. He

stated that he found a rolled-up plastic baggie with crushed white crystals inside.

       Officer Tanner Seal of the JPD stated that he was working on January 14, 2023, when

he conducted a traffic stop on the truck driven by appellant because the license plate was not

displayed on the rear of the vehicle. He said that he made contact with appellant and was

                                               3
advised that appellant was on probation. He stated that he had appellant step out of the

vehicle because of appellant’s prior drug arrests. He testified that there was also a passenger

inside the vehicle who was instructed to remain in the vehicle. Officer Tanner stated that

appellant made a statement about not wanting “to get in trouble again” that made Officer

Tanner place appellant in handcuffs for “officer safety.” Appellant subsequently admitted

to Officer Tanner that methamphetamine was in the vehicle and gave its location. A white

Ziploc baggie with a white crystalized substance inside was found in the vehicle. Officer

Tanner said that the methamphetamine weighed about two grams. Appellant was arrested

and charged with possessing less than two grams of methamphetamine.

       On cross-examination, Officer Tanner admitted that appellant was cooperative.

       The circuit court found that appellant had inexcusably violated the terms and

conditions of his SIS. He was sentenced to twelve years’ imprisonment. This sentence was

to run concurrently to the sentence he received in the companion case, which was heard at

the same time as this revocation.

       To revoke a suspended sentence, the State bears the burden of proving by a

preponderance of the evidence that the defendant violated a condition of the suspended

sentence.2 On appeal, a circuit court’s revocation of a suspended sentence will be affirmed

unless the decision is clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. 3 Evidence that is

       2
           Daniels v. State, 2019 Ark. App. 473, 588 S.W.3d 116.

       3
           Id.

                                               4
insufficient for a criminal conviction may be sufficient for revocation of a suspended

sentence.4 When multiple violations are alleged, a circuit court’s revocation will be affirmed

if the evidence is sufficient to establish that the appellant violated any one condition of the

SIS.5

        Appellant argues that the State failed to prove he was in sole possession of the

methamphetamine found on November 13, 2022, or January 14, 2023. He makes no

specific argument regarding the drug paraphernalia found in the vehicle he was driving on

November 13, and he also fails to challenge the allegation that he tampered with physical

evidence. The circuit court revoked appellant’s SIS without specifying which allegations it

was relying on. When multiple new crimes are alleged, and the circuit court makes no

specific findings as to which offense it relied on, we will affirm if there is sufficient evidence

to establish at least one of the alleged violations.6 Officer Sutton’s undisputed testimony

that the vehicle appellant was driving contained drug paraphernalia (methamphetamine

pipe) is sufficient to support the revocation of appellant’s SIS. Accordingly, we affirm.

        Affirmed.

        WOOD and HIXSON, JJ., agree.

        Terry Goodwin Jones, for appellant.

        4
            Id.

        5
            Id.

        6
            Riley v. State, 2023 Ark. App. 474, 678 S.W.3d 441.

                                                5
Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Lauren Elizabeth Heil, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.

                                        6