Lynn Eugene Young v. State of Arkansas

2025 Ark. App. 13, 703 S.W.3d 569

• Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas
• Decided: January 15, 2025
• Status: Published

Opinion

Cite as 2025 Ark. App. 13 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II No. CR-24-55

LYNN EUGENE YOUNG Opinion Delivered January 15, 2025

APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE IZARD COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT V. [NO. 33CR-19-113]

STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE TIM WEAVER, JUDGE

APPELLEE AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED

STEPHANIE POTTER BARRETT, Judge

Appellant Lynn Eugene Young appeals the Izard County Circuit Court’s sentencing

order revoking his probation and sentencing him to eight years in the Arkansas Division of

Correction. Pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(b) (2023) and Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967), Young’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw stating that there is no

merit to an appeal. The motion is accompanied by a brief in which counsel explains why

there is nothing in the record that would support an appeal. The clerk of this court notified

Young of his right to file pro se points, but he has not done so. We affirm the revocation

and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

On April 7, 2021, Young was sentenced to sixty months’ probation for possession of

methamphetamine or cocaine in violation of Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-64-

419(b)(1)(B) (Supp. 2023), a Class C Felony. On the same day, Young received and signed the “Conditions of Suspended Sentence or Probation” form. The conditions of probation

set forth that Young was not to possess any controlled substance; report as directed to his

probation officer; and comply with drug-treatment programs in the discretion of his

supervising officer.

On July 19, 2023, the State filed a petition to revoke Young’s probation based on the

allegations that he had violated his conditions of probation by possessing and using

controlled substances, failing to report to his supervising officer as required, and evading his

supervising officer. An arrest warrant was issued on the same date. Young was arrested on

August 24, 2023, and was released from custody on posting a $75,000 bond on September

28. On October 4, a pickup order was issued alleging that he tested positive for

methamphetamine after being released on bond. Young’s bond was revoked, and he was

placed in jail pending a hearing. Prior to the hearing, Young filed motions to suppress any

statements he made to officers or property seized pursuant to search warrant and a motion

for discovery. These motions were never presented to the circuit court.

On November 1, 2023, the circuit court held a hearing on the petition to revoke his

probation. The circuit court took judicial notice of the conditions of probation. Officer

Gould testified that he was Young’s probation officer and that under condition three of his

conditions of probation, Young was to refrain from using controlled substances. Officer

Gould then testified that Young had failed three drug tests and tested positive for

amphetamines or methamphetamine on November 7, 17, and 30, 2022. Officer Gould also

testified that Young failed to report on November 16 and December 21, 22, and 28. At that

2 point, Young blurted out, “I did it all. I did everything he said. I’m not going to lie. I did

it.”

Officer Cody Bruyette testified that he is a probation and parole officer. He stated

Young is under his supervision and that Young was not in compliance with his conditions

of probation because he had absconded for approximately six months. Officer Bruyette

testified that Young also admitted to him he had used methamphetamine while released on

bond.

After the State rested, the defense also rested without calling any witnesses. The

circuit court made oral findings that by a preponderance of the evidence, the State had

proved Young had violated the conditions of probation. In its ruling, the circuit court found

Young had used a controlled substance while on probation and had failed to report as

directed to his supervising officer. The circuit court also found there was credible testimony

that Young evaded contact with his probation officer.

Rule 4-3(b)(1) provides that a no-merit brief shall contain an argument section that

consists of a list of all rulings adverse to the defendant made by the circuit court on all

objections, motions, and requests made by either party with an explanation as to why each

adverse ruling is not a meritorious ground for reversal. The brief’s statement of the case and

the facts shall contain, in addition to the other material parts of the record, all rulings adverse

to the defendant made by the circuit court and the page number where each adverse ruling

is located in the appellate record. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(b)(1).

3 In considering a no-merit brief, we must determine whether, after a full examination

of the proceedings, there is any nonfrivolous basis for an appeal. Bohanon v. State, 2020 Ark.

App. 22, 594 S.W.3d 92. The test is not whether there is any reversible error but whether

an appeal would be wholly frivolous. Id. Young’s counsel explained in his brief that there

were no adverse rulings against Young in his trial to be addressed. However, counsel did

address the sufficiency of the evidence and his request for leniency in conjunction with the

sentence being within the range of punishment set by statute.

Here, the circuit court found Young had violated the conditions of his probation by

using controlled substances and failing to report to his supervising officer as required. The

circuit court considered Young’s spontaneous admission that he had used controlled

substances while on probation and failed to report as directed, as well as Officer Gould’s

testimony on this point. Young also admitted to Officer Cody Bruyette that he used

methamphetamine while on bond for his revocation petition. Probation may be revoked

upon a finding by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant has inexcusably failed

to comply with a condition of the probation. Leach v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 17, 453 S.W.3d

690. The State bears the burden of proof but need only prove that the defendant committed

one violation of the conditions. Id. We will not reverse a circuit court’s revocation decision

unless it is clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. Id. A preponderance of the

evidence supports the circuit court’s finding that Young violated the conditions of his

probation by using a controlled substance and failing to report as ordered to his supervising

4 officer. Either of these findings is sufficient to support a finding that he had violated the

terms and conditions of his probation.

Counsel also pointed out in his no merit brief that Young had made a plea for

leniency by asking the court to extend his probation or place him in a drug-rehabilitation

program. The underlying conviction was for possession of methamphetamine or cocaine, a

Class C felony. The maximum sentence for a Class C felony shall not exceed ten years.

Upon revocation, the circuit court sentenced Young to eight years’ incarceration. The

sentence did not exceed the statutory maximum for a Class C felony, and the circuit court

was within its authority and discretion to impose the sentence. While the court did not

expressly reject his plea for leniency, the court did not rule on his request, and Young failed

to obtain a ruling by the circuit court. To preserve a point for appellate review, a party must

obtain a ruling from the circuit court. Wells v. State, 2012 Ark. App. 596, 424 S.W.3d 378

(citing Anderson v. State, 2011 Ark. 461, 385 S.W.3d 214). The burden of obtaining a ruling

on an objection or motion is upon the movant, and the failure to secure a ruling constitutes

a waiver, precluding its consideration on appeal. Id. Baker v. State, 2016 Ark. App. 409.

Consequently, Young’s request for leniency regarding sentencing provides no meritorious

ground for reversal.

We find that counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders and Rule 4-3 and

hold that any appeal would be wholly without merit and frivolous. Accordingly, we grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the revocation of Young’s probation.

Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted.

5 HIXSON and BROWN, JJ., agree.

Matt Kezhaya and Sonia Kezhaya, for appellant.

One brief only.