Peals v. State
2015 Ark. App. 1
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Ricky Peals’s probation was revoked by the Crittenden County Circuit Court; he was sentenced to three years in the Arkansas Department of Correction with four years’ suspended imposition of sentence.
- Appeal counsel filed an Anders no-merit brief and moved to withdraw, asserting no meritorious appellate issues; Peals did not file pro se points and the State did not file a response.
- At the revocation hearing, the court overruled a defense “confrontation”/personal-knowledge objection when a witness testified his aunt called about police at his apartment and identified her by name.
- The court found two violations of Peals’s probation conditions: (1) failure to pay fines and costs (payment ledger showed $1,020 balance after partial payments); (2) commission of residential burglary/theft based on witness Albert Caldwell’s testimony that Peals entered without permission and took items.
- Peals did not testify or offer explanations for nonpayment or the burglary allegation; the court revoked probation by a preponderance of the evidence.
- The appellate court reviewed the record under Anders, found the confrontation ruling harmless (another valid ground supported revocation), concluded the evidence supported revocation, granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether overruling the confrontation/personal-knowledge objection was reversible error | State implicitly: witness had personal knowledge to identify his aunt | Peals: objection under confrontation/Rule 602 made testimony inadmissible | Court: Overruling proper; even if error, harmless because other valid ground supported revocation |
| Whether evidence supported revocation for failure to pay fines and costs | State: payment ledger and testimony show nonpayment | Peals: (no testimony or excuse presented) | Court: Evidence sufficient; burden shifted to Peals to explain nonpayment; none given |
| Whether evidence supported revocation for residential burglary/theft | State: Caldwell testified he found his door kicked in and items missing; Peals admitted taking and returning items but without permission | Peals: (did not testify or present defense) | Court: Caldwell’s testimony sufficient; court credited witness, revocation supported by preponderance |
| Whether appeal presents any non-frivolous issues under Anders | Appellate counsel: no meritorious grounds after review | Peals: did not file pro se points | Court: Agreed with counsel; no-merit appeal, counsel relieved and revocation affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (establishing procedure for counsel to withdraw on no-merit appeals)
- Eads v. State, 47 S.W.3d 918 (discussing Anders compliance and appellate review duties)
- Goforth v. State, 767 S.W.2d 537 (balancing probationer’s confrontation rights against State’s reasons)
- Scroggins v. State, 389 S.W.3d 40 (burden-shifting and proof requirements for revocation based on nonpayment)