Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ransom v. State

Court of Appeals of Arkansas, Divisions I, IV

December 4, 2019

Stanley Vanoy RANSOM, Appellant
v.
STATE of Arkansas, Appellee

Page 360

          APPEAL FROM THE FAULKNER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NOS. 23CR-11-473 & 23CR-11-1001], HONORABLE CHARLES E. CLAWSON, JR., JUDGE

         Ryan C. Allen, North Little Rock, for appellant.

         Leslie Rutledge, Att’y Gen., by: Adam Jackson, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.

         OPINION

         BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge

          In 2012, Ransom was found guilty in two separate cases and placed on probation in each one of them. The Faulkner County Circuit Court sentenced Ransom to eighty-four months’ probation for robbery, seventy-two months’ probation for second-degree battery, twelve months’ probation for domestic battery third, and twelve months’ probation for resisting arrest

Page 361

in case number 473. In case number 1001, the court sentenced Ransom to eighty-four months’ probation for failing to appear.

          Fast forward to 2015 when the State filed petitions to revoke Ransom’s probation. After hearings on the petitions, the court found that Ransom had violated the terms imposed in each of the two cases that were originally adjudicated in 2012. The court’s decisions were reduced to one written judgment, which was entered on 23 March 2015. The March judgment, which we have reproduced as an addendum to this opinion, is straightforward. It has two checkmarks. Next to the first checkmark the judgment reads, "[T]he Defendant has violated the terms and conditions of his probation." Next to the second check mark is this statement: "The Defendant shall serve 30 days in the Faulkner County Detention Center, with a credit for 41 days spent in custody awaiting disposition of this matter." The rest of the form boxes or spaces are unchecked. Ransom did not appeal the March 2015 judgment.

          In August 2015, the State filed a petition to revoke Ransom’s probation in case number 473, which the State later amended in September 2015 to include case number 1001. In December 2015, the circuit court entered a judgment for the State on those petitions. Ransom did not appeal.

          In July 2016, the State again filed a petition to revoke and then amended it in case number 473. In October 2016, the circuit court entered a judgment in case numbers 473 and 1001. Ransom did not appeal.

          In 2017, the State filed two more petitions to revoke. The two petitions were decided together by the circuit court in November 2018. The court revoked Ransom’s probation in both cases. In case number 473, the court sentenced him to an aggregate term of fifteen years in the Arkansas Department of Correction. In case number 1001, the court sentenced Ransom to ten years’ imprisonment. These dispositions are reflected in two separate judgments entered on 20 November 2018 (no. 473) and 3 December 2018 (no. 1001).

         A few days after the December 3 judgment had been entered, Ransom filed posttrial motions and asked the court to set aside the November and December 2018 judgments. He argued that the court had no jurisdiction to revoke his probation because he was not on probation. This in turn meant the November 2018 and December 2018 judgments must be vacated. The posttrial motions were deemed denied by operation of law when the court did not rule on them within thirty days after they were filed. Ark. R. Crim. P. 33.3(c) (2019). Ransom timely appealed the two 2018 judgments; he did not appeal the deemed denial of his posttrial motions.

          In this court, Ransom argues that the circuit court’s 23 March 2015 judgment sentenced him to thirty days in jail but did not extend his probation period. Consequently, he was not on probation when the State filed any petition to revoke after he had served the sentence imposed by the March 2015 judgment. Because he was not on probation when the court purported to revoke any probation period after the March 2015 judgment was ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.