Sherril v. State
2014 Ark. App. 411
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- In June 2010 Verlin Sherril pleaded guilty to second-degree forgery and received a ten-year suspended imposition of sentence with conditions including $3,500 restitution at $50/month and obeying state law.
- On May 28, 2013 the State petitioned to revoke Sherril’s suspension, alleging failure to pay restitution and commission of first-degree battery (May 16, 2013 stabbing of Braxton Cole).
- At the revocation hearing the State introduced a ledger showing significant restitution delinquency; Sherril admitted owing and missing payments but offered no reasonable excuse.
- The victim testified that Sherril stabbed him in the neck with a box cutter, causing serious injury and multiple surgeries; Sherril claimed self‑defense and later alleged the Miranda form was forged.
- The trial court revoked the suspension on July 15, 2013 and sentenced Sherril to six years in prison with a four-year suspended sentence to follow; Sherril appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Sherril) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether revocation was supported by nonpayment of restitution | State: ledger and testimony show significant delinquency; nonpayment is an independent violation | Sherril: asserted he owed but gave no viable excuse for nonpayment | Court: Affirmed; nonpayment proved and alone justified revocation |
| Whether revocation was supported by commission of first-degree battery | State: victim testimony established stabbing causing serious injury with a deadly weapon | Sherril: claimed self-defense and attacked victim's credibility | Court: Affirmed; court credited victim, battery proved (but unnecessary given restitution violation) |
| Whether custodial statement/Miranda form was forged and should have been suppressed | State: officer testified Sherril signed warnings and waived rights | Sherril: claimed officer forged his signature on Miranda warnings | Court: Rejected; officer testimony credited and Sherril made no suppression motion below |
| Whether sentence should be reduced as excessive or illegal | State: sentence was within statutory range for original offense | Sherril: asked for reduction (did not claim illegality) | Court: Denied; sentence lawful and within statutory authority |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedural standard for counsel withdrawal when appeal is frivolous)
- Palmer v. State, 959 S.W.2d 420 (Ark. Ct. App.) (once State shows nonpayment of restitution, defendant must offer an excuse)