Full Opinion

Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 482 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CR-26-7 Opinion Delivered October 7, 2026 ADAM MURPHY APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE ASHLEY COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT V. [NO. 02CR-24-131] STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE ROBERT B. GIBSON APPELLEE III, JUDGE AFFIRMED MIKE MURPHY, Judge Appellant Adam Murphy appeals the decision of the Ashley County Circuit Court revoking his suspended imposition of sentence (SIS) and sentencing him to twenty-five years in the Arkansas Division of Correction. On appeal Murphy argues that his sentence is excessive. We affirm. On November 20, 2024, Murphy pleaded guilty to commercial burglary, a Class C felony, and criminal mischief, a Class A misdemeanor. He was sentenced to a sixty-month and twelve-month SIS, respectively, to run concurrently. One of the conditions of his SIS was that he not commit any crimes punishable by confinement in jail or prison; another condition was that he not consume controlled substances. The State filed a petition to revoke Murphy’s SIS on August 13, 2025, alleging that Murphy had engaged in criminal activity and that he had been charged with indecent exposure, theft of services, criminal mischief, and criminal trespassing. An amended petition to revoke was filed on October 2, 2025, alleging the same and adding the new allegation that Murphy had tested positive for controlled substances on September 9, 2025. Because Murphy challenges only the length of his sentence, an involved overview of the evidence presented at trial is unnecessary, suffice it to say that the State presented sufficient evidence that Murphy had conducted himself in a manner that would support the new charges and that he also tested positive for marijuana, methamphetamine, and amphetamines while on SIS. At the conclusion of the evidence, the circuit court found that Murphy had violated a condition of his SIS by using methamphetamine. Murphy was sentenced to twenty five years’ incarceration. On appeal, he argues that his sentence was excessive. Sentencing in Arkansas is entirely a matter of statute, and no sentence shall be imposed other than as prescribed by statute. Lenard v. State, 2014 Ark. 478, 522 S.W.3d 118. When the sentence given is within the maximum prescribed by law, the sentence is not illegal because the court has the authority to impose it. Richie v. State, 2009 Ark. 602, 357 S.W.3d 909. Murphy acknowledges that his sentence is lawful. After review, we agree. Murphy pleaded guilty to commercial burglary, a Class C felony, and criminal mischief, a Class A misdemeanor. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-39-201(b)(2) (Supp. 2023); Ark. Code Ann. § 5-38- 203(b)(1) (Supp. 2023). Because he is a habitual offender with more than four felony convictions, the sentencing range was between five and thirty years for the commercial- 2 burglary conviction alone. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-501(b)(2)(D) (Supp. 2023). Murphy’s twenty-five-year sentence is below the thirty-year statutory maximum. When a circuit court finds that revocation is appropriate, it may impose any sentence that might have been imposed originally for the offense to which the defendant pleaded guilty. Ark. Code Ann. § 16-93-308(g)(1)(A) (Supp. 2023); Brookshire v. State, 2021 Ark. App. 315, at 10, 633 S.W.3d 782, 788. If the sentence falls within the legislative limits set by the General Assembly, “the appellate court is not at liberty to reduce it.” Id. This is true even if we did consider the sentence unduly harsh. Brown v. State, 2010 Ark. 472, at 16, 378 S.W.3d 66, 75. Because Murphy’s sentence is within the statutory range, we are obligated to affirm. Affirmed. GLADWIN and THYER, JJ., agree. Jacob Brister, for appellant. Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Mallory Wood, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee. 3