Trotter v. State, 465 S.W.3d 860

In July 2010 Fabian Trotter pleaded guilty to possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and received a four-year probation term with conditions including payment of fines, costs, and fees in $50 monthly installments beginning August 2010.
The State petitioned to revoke probation in October 2013, alleging five violations, including failure to pay fines/costs/fees.
At the June 2014 revocation hearing, the State presented evidence (collection officer Amy Peyton) that Trotter owed $1,645 and had made no payments or contact regarding payment.
Probation officer Michael Alston testified that he repeatedly told Trotter to make payments and that Trotter claimed he was making them; Trotter did not testify or present any excuse for nonpayment.
The trial court found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Trotter inexcusably violated the payment condition and revoked probation, sentencing him to five years in the Department of Correction.
Trotter appealed; counsel filed a Rule 4-3(k) no-merit brief and moved to withdraw. The court reviewed the record for arguable appeal and considered whether counsel’s no-merit brief complied with the rule.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Trotter)	Held
Whether revocation was supported by a preponderance of the evidence	State argued it proved nonpayment by preponderance and thus violation of probation	Trotter offered no evidence or excuse for nonpayment	Revocation affirmed — trial court’s finding not clearly against the preponderance of the evidence
Whether burden shifted to defendant after State proved nonpayment	State argued that once nonpayment was shown, defendant must offer a reasonable excuse	Trotter did not present any excuse or proof of inability to pay	Court held burden shifted and defendant failed to meet it; supports revocation
Whether evidence showed inability to pay (excuse for nonpayment)	State maintained no proof of inability; evidence showed zero payments	Trotter did not present testimony or evidence of financial inability	Court found no proof of inability and substantial proof of nonpayment; no reversible error
Whether counsel’s Rule 4-3(k) no-merit brief complied and appeal was frivolous	State argued counsel’s brief was compliant and no meritorious appeal existed	Trotter did not file pro se points; no substantive argument presented	Court held counsel’s no-merit brief complied, granted motion to withdraw, and affirmed judgment

Campbell v. State, 74 Ark. App. 277 (2001) (appellate duty to examine record in no-merit appeals)
Gossett v. State, 87 Ark. App. 317 (2004) (appellate deference to trial court credibility and weight of evidence in revocation proceedings)
Palmer v. State, 60 Ark. App. 97 (1998) (once State proves nonpayment, defendant must present reasonable excuse)