Kidwell v. State
2017 Ark. App. 4
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In January 2015, Thomas Kidwell pleaded guilty to theft of property and received six years’ probation with various conditions (fines, restitution, reporting, home/employment visits, residence restrictions, no alcohol/controlled substances).
- The State filed a petition to revoke Kidwell’s probation alleging multiple violations: nonpayment of fines/costs/restitution, failure to report, refusal to permit visits, unauthorized residence change, and use of controlled substances and alcohol.
- Probation officer Brittany Quinn testified Kidwell understood the conditions, had made no payments (though supervision fees were waived and Kidwell is disabled), missed scheduled reporting (group sessions and “Color of the Day”), and could not be located at the only address he provided.
- Quinn testified Kidwell tested positive multiple times for oxycodone/opiates and for alcohol; officer acknowledged prescription could excuse opioids only if a prescription existed.
- The trial court found Kidwell violated multiple probation conditions and revoked probation, sentencing him to six years’ imprisonment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether revocation was supported by nonpayment of fines/costs/restitution | State: nonpayment is a probation violation supporting revocation | Kidwell: nonpayment excused by disability and waiver of supervision fees | Court: did not rely on this alone; other violations suffice to support revocation |
| Whether revocation was supported by failure to report as directed | State: Quinn’s testimony showed missed required reporting dates | Kidwell: group reporting and “Color of the Day” were not in written conditions; he may have lived at provided address | Court: probation required reporting as directed by officer; testimony established failures to report; held violation proven |
| Whether revocation was supported by positive drug/alcohol tests | State: positive tests for controlled substances and alcohol violate conditions | Kidwell: positive opioid tests could be from prescribed back-pain medication | Court: prescription might explain opioids but does not explain alcohol positives; alcohol prohibition violated; thus violation proved |
Key Cases Cited
- King v. State, 494 S.W.3d 463 (Ark. Ct. App.) (appellate deference to trial court on credibility and preponderance standard in probation revocation)
- Jefferson v. State, 470 S.W.3d 687 (Ark. Ct. App.) (only one proven violation is sufficient to uphold probation revocation)