State of Arkansas v. Kentara Brown, 590 S.W.3d 121

In 2009 Kentara Brown pleaded guilty to Class C felony theft and was sentenced to three years’ probation; the State conceded the original order was under Act 531 (Community Punishment Act).
The original judgment referenced Act 531 in probation conditions but left a checkbox about Act 531 eligibility blank.
In 2011 the court revoked that probation after violations; Brown pleaded guilty to the revocation and the court entered a new judgment resentencing her to four years’ probation.
The post-revocation judgment explicitly stated it was not under Act 531 and its conditions omitted Act 531 references.
In 2018 Brown petitioned to expunge her conviction under Act 531; the circuit court granted the petition relying on the original Act 531 order and concluded Brown had satisfactorily complied.
The State appealed, arguing Brown failed to successfully complete probation under Act 531 and the post-revocation sentence was not eligible for expungement.

Issue	State's Argument	Brown's Argument	Held
Whether Brown was eligible for expungement under Act 531 after revocation and resentencing	Revocation means she did not successfully complete the original Act 531 probation; the post-revocation order expressly disavowed Act 531 and therefore is ineligible	The original sentence was under Act 531; revocation simply increased supervision (not a failure), and completion of supervision makes her eligible	Reversed: Brown did not successfully complete probation under the Act; the post-revocation order was not under Act 531, so the court lacked authority to expunge

Fulmer v. State, 337 Ark. 177 (Ark. 1999) (expungement available only when statutory requirements are met)
Burnett v. State, 368 Ark. 625 (Ark. 2007) (court lacks authority to expunge when defendant was not sentenced under the statute authorizing expungement)
Bolin v. State, 459 S.W.3d 788 (Ark. 2015) (eligibility depends on whether case facts align with statutory criteria; notation on judgment not dispositive)