Truitt v. State
2015 Ark. App. 276
Ark. Ct. App.2015Background
- In November 2011, Larry Truitt pled guilty to possession of pseudoephedrine with intent to manufacture methamphetamine and was placed on five years’ probation.
- The State petitioned to revoke probation (March and amended August 2013) alleging multiple violations: nonpayment of fines/costs/fees, failure to report, repeated positive amphetamine tests (ten positives alleged), refusal of a drug test, failure to complete a treatment program, arrests, and leaving approved residence.
- Probation supervisor and sheriff’s department witness testified Truitt made no payments on a $1,000 fine and $770 costs (ordered $50/month) and had numerous positive drug tests; Truitt failed the treatment program for noncompliance.
- Truitt admitted ten positive drug tests, lack of steady employment since 2012, and nonpayment; he argued difficulty obtaining work as a felon was a reasonable excuse for nonpayment.
- The circuit court found Truitt inexcusably violated probation (nonpayment, drug positives, failure to complete program) and sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment.
- On appeal Truitt argued the court clearly erred in finding his violations inexcusable; the court of appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Truitt inexcusably failed to pay fines/costs/fees | State: nonpayment shown; burden shifts to probationer to excuse nonpayment | Truitt: difficulty obtaining employment as a felon was a reasonable excuse for nonpayment | Court: Credibility finding for circuit court; Truitt’s excuse not reasonable; failure to pay deemed inexcusable |
| Whether evidence supported revocation (standard of proof/deference) | State: proved at least one violation by preponderance; revocation appropriate | Truitt: overall violations excusable or insufficient to revoke | Court: Only one proven, inexcusable violation needed; deference to circuit court on credibility; revocation affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Vail v. State, 438 S.W.3d 286 (Ark. Ct. App. 2014) (when nonpayment proven, burden shifts to probationer to produce reasonable excuse)
- Scroggins v. State, 389 S.W.3d 40 (Ark. Ct. App. 2012) (probationer must justify failure to pay; state retains ultimate burden to prove failure was inexcusable)