FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NINTH DIVISION [NO.
60PR-95-376] HONORABLE MARY SPENCER MCGOWAN, JUDGE
William R. Simpson, Jr., Public Defender, by: Clint Miller,
Deputy Pub. Def., for appellant.
Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: Adam Jackson, Ass't
Att'y Gen., for appellee.
D. VAUGHT, Judge
Qiana Allmon-Lipscomb appeals from an order entered by the
Pulaski County Circuit Court revoking her order of
conditional release, claiming there was insufficient evidence
that she violated the conditions of her release. We affirm.
February 9, 1995, Lipscomb (sixteen years old at the time)
was acquitted by reason of mental disease or defect of the
offenses of aggravated assault, terroristic threatening, and
endangering the welfare of a minor. She was committed to the custody of the
director of the Arkansas Department of Human Services (DHS)
for evaluation and treatment. Over the course of the next
seventeen years, Lipscomb was conditionally released from
treatment and had her release revoked five times.
September 5, 2012, the circuit court entered its most recent
order granting Lipscomb a conditional release. The order
stated that Lipscomb's primary diagnosis is
"Personality Disorder, Cluster B Type (including
Borderline, Histrionic, Narcissistic and Antisocial
traits)." Some of the conditions of her release included
that she comply in all aspects with recommended medical,
psychiatric, or psychological treatment and therapy; take all
medications currently prescribed; remain at her approved
residence and not leave without prior authorization from her
treatment team; and submit to one-to-one supervision,
twenty-four hours per day. The order of conditional release
was modified on September 19, 2014, to change her treatment
team. All other conditions of her release remained the same.
The order was modified a second time on August 31, 2015, due
to Lipscomb's lack of compliance. The August 31 order
provided that she was to comply in all respects with
recommended treatment and therapy, comply with curfew
requirements, and submit to twenty-four-hour-per-day nursing
supervision. Regarding the nursing supervision, the order
stated that "[Lipscomb] and her [one-to-one nursing]
staff shall treat each other with dignity and respect at all
December 4, 2015, the State filed a motion for revocation of
conditional release, alleging that Lipscomb was not in
compliance. The motion attached a report of Sonya Davis, a
certified nursing assistant employed by Arkansas Healthcare
Personnel (AHP), who was assigned one-to-one nursing
supervision of Lipscomb. Davis's report details an
incident on November 17, 2015, when Lipscomb became upset;
yelled and cursed at her (Lipscomb's) boyfriend, her
four-year-old daughter, and Davis; and threatened to kill
Davis and the boyfriend with a butcher knife. According to
Davis, Lipscomb's boyfriend tackled Lipscomb, causing her
to drop the knife. Davis said Lipscomb "ran back up on
me[, ] chest to chest[, ] pointing in my face saying she was
going to kick my ass." Davis reported that Lipscomb said
that she was not scared to go back to the state hospital,
that she had killed somebody before and all they did was lock
her up in the hospital, and that she would do it again.
Davis's report also stated that Lipscomb pushed her
daughter to the ground during the incident.
March 3, 2016, the circuit court held a hearing regarding the
State's motion to revoke Lipscomb's conditional
release, and on April 11, 2016, the court issued a five-page
order granting the motion. The circuit court detailed the
history of this case, including Lipscomb's criminal
history,  and summarized the hearing
testimony. The court then found:
In this case, based on the testimony presented, the Court
finds that Qiana Allmon[-Lipscomb] threatened Sonia Davis
with a knife, verbally threatened to assault Ms. Davis,
assaulted her own four[-]year[-]old child, and threatened to
assault another patient at the Arkansas State Hospital. All
of these actions are violations of the conditional release
review proceedings regarding the conditional release and
revocation of an acquittee by mental disease or defect de
novo, but the decision of the court will not be disturbed
unless clearly erroneous. M.E. v. State, 2010
Ark.App. 394, at 3-4. In making our review, we give due
regard to the superior position and opportunity of the court
to determine the credibility of the witnesses. Id.
at 4. A finding is clearly erroneous when, although there is
evidence to support it, the appellate court after reviewing
the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm
conviction that a mistake has been committed. Id.
The governing statute provides that
[a]fter notice to the conditionally released person and a
hearing, the court may determine that the conditionally
released person has violated a condition of release or that
for the safety of the conditionally released person or for
the safety of the person or property of another person the
conditional release should be modified, extended ...