Williams v. State

Decision Date14 December 2016
Docket NumberNo. CR–16–428,CR–16–428
CitationWilliams v. State, 509 S.W.3d 677 (Ark. App. 2016)
Parties Teaira WILLIAMS, Appellant v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee
CourtArkansas Court of Appeals

Terry Goodwin Jones, for appellant.

Leslie Rutledge, Att'y Gen., Little Rock, AR, by: Amanda Jegley, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.

BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge

Teaira Williams appeals the revocation of her probation, arguing that the circuit court erred in denying her motion for continuance and in finding that she willfully failed to pay as ordered. We affirm.

In April 2013, Williams pled guilty to theft of property and was sentenced to five years' probation. Among the conditions of her probation were that she not commit any criminal offense punishable by imprisonment; not possess a firearm or other deadly weapon; report to her probation officer; notify her probation officer of any change of address; and pay $35 per month in supervision fees, $4573.33 in restitution, and $756 in fines and costs. Williams was ordered to pay $100 per month toward these amounts beginning in May 2013.

In December 2013, the State filed a petition to revoke Williams's probation, alleging that she had violated the conditions of her probation by committing the crime of aggravated assault and possessing a handgun. Between December 2013 and June 2015, the circuit court granted thirteen continuances at Williams's request. The revocation petition was amended in August 2015 to include an allegation that Williams had committed the offense of criminal mischief. Also in August 2015, Williams requested and received her fourteenth continuance.

In December 2015, the petition was again amended to include allegations that Williams had failed to report, changed her residence without proper notification, and failed to pay fines. The circuit court granted two more continuances at Williams's request, in December 2015 and January 2016, and set the revocation hearing for 1 February 2016.

When the hearing began, Williams requested a continuance because she had been unable to compel the attendance of a witness for her defense. This witness, she argued, would provide testimony relevant to the aggravated-assault allegation. After noting that over two years had passed since the filing of the petition to revoke and that several continuances had already been granted to secure the presence of that particular witness, the circuit court denied the request, finding that "there have been ample opportunities for her to be here and she has not come."

The State proceeded with its case in chief, and Tammy Hubble, a staff accountant with the Craighead County Sheriff's Office, testified that Williams had made six payments since 2013 and that a balance of $4949.33 remained. Keith Ming, Williams's probation officer, testified that Williams was supposed to report monthly but that she had not reported to him since July 2015. Several witnesses testified to an incident in July 2013 in which Williams had argued with and threatened some other women with a gun. Chancellon McMillion, the father of Williams's two children, testified that Williams had vandalized his car in April 2015 by smashing his windshield with a paint bucket. And finally, Detective Jason Simpkins with the Jonesboro Police Department testified that he had investigated the criminal-mischief allegation involving McMillion's car and that Williams admitted to him that she had damaged the car.

Williams's sister and mother both testified that she did not have a gun at the time of the July 2013 incident. Williams testified that she had held several jobs since 2013 and that she was currently working as a waitress. Williams admitted that she had argued with some other women but denied having a gun or pointing a gun at them. She did admit to damaging McMillion's car with the paint bucket. She also explained that she had not seen her probation officer since July 2015 because she was stressed out all the time and had "got to the point where [she] want[ed] to just give up on everything." She also admitted that "some" of her failure to pay was her...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
  • Clark v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Court of Appeals
    • 11 de setembro de 2019
    ...grounds, and the appellant fails to attack any independent, alternative bases, the appellate court will affirm. Williams v. State , 2016 Ark. App. 601, at 5, 509 S.W.3d 677, 680. Even considering appellant's argument, we find no merit. Appellant admitted violating the no-contact order but a......
  • Brown v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Court of Appeals
    • 14 de dezembro de 2016
  • Harden v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Court of Appeals
    • 6 de setembro de 2023
    ...we will affirm without addressing arguments targeted to the other grounds. See id. at 5, 584 S.W.3d at 683 ; Williams v. State , 2016 Ark. App. 601, 509 S.W.3d 677 ; Barber v. State , 2014 Ark. App. 311 ; Morgan v. State , 2012 Ark. App. 357. But none of those was an Anders appeal. This app......
  • Quijada v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Court of Appeals
    • 8 de setembro de 2021
    ...and that court's decision will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion amounting to a denial of justice. Williams v. State , 2016 Ark. App. 601, at 4, 509 S.W.3d 677, 679. The abuse-of-discretion standard is a high threshold and requires the appellant to make a showing that the circui......
  • Get Started for Free