King v. State
2016 Ark. App. 292
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Joshua Caleb King pled guilty in two cases: possession with intent to deliver psilocybin, possession with intent to deliver marijuana, and paraphernalia (CR-2013-910), and failure to appear (CR-2013-940). He was placed on 120 months’ probation with various conditions, including no consumption of alcohol, attendance at substance-abuse assessment and AA/CR meetings, nine months in CCC, and monthly payments toward fines and fees.
- The State filed a petition to revoke probation alleging (1) new offenses—third-degree domestic battery and assault on a family member (Nov. 8, 2014); (2) alcohol use in Sept.–Nov. 2014; (3) failure to attend a scheduled substance-abuse assessment; (4) failure to attend required AA/CR meetings; and (5) arrears on court-ordered financial obligations.
- Probation officer Chrissy Duncan testified King admitted drinking in Sept., Oct., and Nov. 2014, missed a substance-abuse assessment (stated he forgot), and failed to attend AA/CR because of social anxiety; Duncan had received an anonymous tip about drinking.
- Deputy Hudgens testified and provided audio/video from the Nov. 8, 2014 domestic-disturbance arrest showing King uncooperative and appearing under the influence; Hudgens identified King as the primary aggressor.
- The clerk testified King was $1,330 past due on fines/fees. The trial court found all State witnesses credible and concluded, by a preponderance of the evidence, that King violated multiple probation terms. The court revoked probation and imposed concurrent prison sentences totaling twenty years.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (King) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to revoke probation | State: Probation revoked because King violated conditions (alcohol use, missed assessment, missed meetings, unpaid fees, and new criminal offenses); evidence included admissions, officer observations, and arrest video/audio. | King: Insufficient evidence—Duncan did not witness drinking, relied on unidentified third-party tip; alleged Confrontation Clause problem; ACC policy violations (no written memorialization or testing) undermine proof. | Court: Affirmed revocation; one proved violation (alcohol use) is sufficient; Duncan’s testimony of King’s admissions and Hudgens’s observations/video supported finding. |
| Admissibility/confrontation of third-party report | State: Duncan did not rely solely on the anonymous tip; she relied on King’s own admissions and other evidence. | King: Reliance on an out-of-court accusation violated his right to confront witnesses. | Court: Rejected confrontation claim because Duncan’s testimony included King’s admissions and other independent evidence; Confrontation issue not established. |
| Failure to follow ACC policy (no test/documentation) | State: Noncompliance with ACC paperwork/policy does not negate sworn testimony and other evidence of alcohol use. | King: Duncan’s failure to document or chemically test means ACC policy was not followed so violation should not be found. | Court: Declined to find that ACC policy noncompliance invalidated credible testimony; appellant offered no supporting authority. |
| Need to prove multiple violations to revoke | State: Alleged multiple violations; revocation appropriate if any proven. | King: Challenged each alleged violation as unsupported. | Court: Only one violation need be proved; alcohol use was sufficiently proved, so revocation upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- Robinson v. State, 446 S.W.3d 190 (Ark. Ct. App. 2014) (only one probation violation need be proved to support revocation)
- Alsbrook v. State, 479 S.W.3d 584 (Ark. Ct. App. 2016) (appellate court need not consider arguments unsupported by authority)