Reddi Parker v. State of Arkansas

2025 Ark. App. 581
CourtCourt of Appeals of Arkansas
DecidedDecember 3, 2025
StatusPublished

This text of 2025 Ark. App. 581 (Reddi Parker v. State of Arkansas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Reddi Parker v. State of Arkansas, 2025 Ark. App. 581 (Ark. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Cite as 2025 Ark. App. 581 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I No. CR-24-614

REDDI PARKER Opinion Delivered December 3, 2025

APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE CRAIGHEAD COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, V. WESTERN DISTRICT [NO. 16JCR-23-434] STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE HONORABLE CHRIS THYER, JUDGE

AFFIRMED

WENDY SCHOLTENS WOOD, Judge

Reddi Parker appeals from an order of the Craighead County Circuit Cout revoking

his probation and sentencing him to twenty years’ imprisonment followed by ten years’

suspended imposition of sentence (SIS) for possession of a controlled substance with purpose

to deliver and six years’ imprisonment for first-degree endangering the welfare of a minor.

Parker raises three points on appeal: (1) the circuit court erred in denying his motion for

directed verdict because none of the items discovered at his residence were field-tested; (2)

the State failed to present evidence that he failed to pay court costs; and (3) the circuit court

abused its discretion by considering inadmissible evidence during the sentencing phase of

trial. We affirm.

On January 8, 2024, Parker entered a negotiated guilty plea to possession of a

controlled substance (methamphetamine) with purpose to deliver (Class A felony) and first- degree endangering the welfare of a minor (Class D felony). The circuit court sentenced

Parker to four years’ probation. Parker was ordered to pay fines, fees, and costs in fifty-dollar

installments beginning thirty days after his plea. The conditions of Parker’s probation

included requirements that he not commit a criminal offense punishable by imprisonment;

that he not use, sell, distribute, or possess any controlled substance; and that he pay his costs,

fines, and fees as directed. On May 16, the State filed a petition to revoke Parker’s probation

alleging that he “willfully violated one or more of conditions” of probation because

• [He had f]ailed to live a law-abiding life, to be of good behavior, and not violate any state, federal, or municipal laws. • On or about 04/19/24, Parker was in possession of methamphetamine, LSD, Xanax, and drug paraphernalia. • Parker has failed to pay court costs to the Craighead County Sheriff’s Department and has a balance of $940.00[.]

A revocation hearing took place on June 24. Officer Chris Jefferson of the Jonesboro

Police Department testified that he had been with the department for twelve years. During

the last four years, Officer Jefferson was assigned to the drug task force and had spent three

years with the street-crimes unit. Both assignments focused mainly on narcotics

investigations. Officer Jefferson has over one hundred hours of training in narcotics

investigations beyond the law-enforcement-academy training.

Officer Jefferson testified that he and Agent Jeremy Parnell were conducting

surveillance of Parker’s home on April 19 after receiving complaints of “heavy traffic” from

“residents” of the Sage Meadows neighborhood. Both were familiar with Parker and knew

he was on probation with a search waiver. They made contact with Parker when he was

2 entering a vehicle parked in his driveway. Agent Parnell made contact with Parker, and

Officer Jefferson went inside and cleared the home. Parker’s minor child and his girlfriend

were both home at the time. Officer Jefferson found a “used glass methamphetamine pipe”

in the garage. When he searched the car, Officer Jefferson found a backpack sitting behind

the seat where Parker had been sitting. It contained several trading cards and sports

memorabilia, which Parker was known to sell online. In the bottom compartment of the

backpack, Officer Jefferson found two pill containers with over one hundred Xanax pills,

over two grams of methamphetamine divided between two baggies, and three “tabs” of LSD.

From his training and experience, Officer Jefferson was able to identify the pills as

Xanax because of the imprint on the pill, adding that he used “Google” to identify the

number imprinted on the pill. Officer Jefferson acknowledged that Xanax is a prescription

drug but said he did not find the pills in a bottle with a prescription for Parker or his child.

Officer Jefferson did not believe the pills were for Parker’s personal use because of the large

quantity and the way in which they were stored.

Officer Jefferson further testified that he had seen methamphetamine before and said

it is the most common controlled substance in Craighead County. He believed the substance

found inside the backpack was methamphetamine because of its white crystal-like appearance

and its packaging. He stated that the LSD he found, which he also identified on the basis of

his experience, was a “tab”—a small piece of cardboard or paper with designs on the back

that are torn off and placed on the tongue to dissolve.

3 Agent Jeremy Parnell testified that he has been with the Jonesboro Police Department

for over twenty-five years. He had been assigned to the drug task force for the last seven years.

Agent Parnell has approximately 240 hours of additional narcotics training. Agent Parnell

agreed that they found both Xanax and LSD in Parker’s backpack. He described the LSD as

tiny stamps, similar to postage stamps.

Agent Parnell testified that after he read Parker his Miranda rights, Parker admitted

that everything that was found belonged to him. Agent Parnell said that the items found

were not field-tested because there were lots of cars driving through, and they wanted to get

out of the neighborhood as soon as they could. He also stated that the items were not sent

to the crime laboratory for testing.

At the close of the evidence, Parker moved for a directed verdict on the basis that the

State failed to establish that the items were illegal drugs because they were not field-tested.

The circuit court denied the motion and found that Parker violated the terms and conditions

of his probation, finding by a preponderance of the evidence that the items found were

drugs. The circuit court placed significant importance on Parker’s “claiming ownership of

all of that and claiming that they were drugs.” The court sentenced Parker to twenty years’

imprisonment for the possession conviction followed by ten years’ SIS and six years’

imprisonment on the endangerment conviction. This appeal followed.

To revoke a defendant’s probation, the circuit court must find by a preponderance of

the evidence that the defendant inexcusably violated a condition of probation. Travis v. State,

2025 Ark. App. 255, at 5. The State has the burden of proof but need only prove one

4 violation. Id. We will not reverse the circuit court’s decision to revoke unless it is clearly

against a preponderance of the evidence. Id. When the determination of a preponderance of

the evidence turns on questions of credibility and weight, we defer to the superior position

of the circuit court to decide these matters. Id. The burden of proof in a revocation case—

preponderance of the evidence—is lower than that required to convict in a criminal trial;

thus, evidence that is insufficient for a conviction may be sufficient for a revocation. Linton

v. State, 2025 Ark. App. 497, at 6.

Parker first argues that the circuit court erred in denying his motion for directed

verdict because none of the items discovered at his residence were field-tested. Parker

contends that Officer Jefferson’s and Agent Parnell’s identification of the items found in

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jordan Abernathy v. State of Arkansas
2024 Ark. App. 532 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2024)
Bobby Kellensworth v. State of Arkansas
2021 Ark. 5 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2021)
Brandon S. Fannin v. State of Arkansas
2021 Ark. App. 304 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2021)
Heather Travis v. State of Arkansas
2025 Ark. App. 255 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2025)
Joe Doss v. State of Arkansas
2025 Ark. App. 411 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2025)
Jerry Linton v. State of Arkansas
2025 Ark. App. 497 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2025)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2025 Ark. App. 581, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reddi-parker-v-state-of-arkansas-arkctapp-2025.