2020 Ark. App. 559
Ark. Ct. App.2020Background
- Walker pleaded guilty in August 2016 to attempted delivery and possession of methamphetamine and was placed on five years’ probation.
- In February 2019 the State petitioned to revoke probation, alleging positive marijuana test, failure to report, failure to show employment/enrollment, unpaid fines, and failure to complete court-ordered community service.
- At the revocation hearing the court found multiple violations and imposed concurrent four-year prison terms on each count.
- Walker appealed via a no-merit (Anders) appeal; appellate counsel’s initial no-merit brief was found deficient and counsel was ordered to rebrief.
- Counsel filed a substituted brief addressing the deficiencies and moved to be relieved; Walker filed no pro se points.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed sufficiency of the evidence, denial of a requested continuance, and an evidentiary (hearsay) ruling, found no nonfrivolous issues, affirmed the revocation, and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to revoke probation | Walker argued revocation was unsupported | State showed multiple violations, several admitted by Walker | No arguable merit; evidence supported revocation |
| Denial of continuance | Walker (through counsel) requested continuance to remain free and continue compliance | State and court treated denial as within discretion | Denial was not an abuse of discretion; no merit |
| Hearsay/admissibility of witness testimony | Walker objected to hearsay testimony | State noted evidentiary rules are relaxed in revocation hearings and errors would be harmless given other violations | Any evidentiary error was harmless; no reversible error |
| Counsel’s Anders/no‑merit procedure and motion to withdraw | Walker filed no pro se points; counsel sought leave to withdraw after filing substituted brief | State and court required brief to meet no‑merit standards; counsel corrected deficiencies | Court accepted substituted no‑merit brief, found appeal frivolous, affirmed and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (sets attorney duties in no‑merit appeals)
- Walker v. State, 604 S.W.3d 611 (2020) (addresses no‑merit brief requirements and this case’s rebriefing)
- Bohanon v. State, 594 S.W.3d 92 (2020) (standard whether appeal is wholly frivolous)
- Dye v. State, 576 S.W.3d 73 (2019) (continuance reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Whitmore v. State, 539 S.W.3d 596 (2018) (rules of evidence are relaxed in revocation proceedings)
- Brock v. State, 14 S.W.3d 908 (2000) (harmless‑error doctrine in revocation context)