Full Opinion

Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 469 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I No. CR-25-653 MARIO TERRELL BROWN Opinion Delivered October 7, 2026 APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE GREENE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT V. [NO. 28CR-21-644] STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE PAMELA APPELLEE HONEYCUTT, JUDGE AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge Mario Brown appeals the revocation of the five-year probation sentence he received upon his plea of guilty in July 2021 to three felonies—possession of a firearm by certain persons, Ark. Code Ann. § 5-73-103(c) (Supp. 2019) (Class B); aggravated assault, Ark. Code Ann. § 5-13-204 (Repl. 2013) (Class D); and theft by receiving, Ark. Code Ann. § 5-36-106(e)(3)(A) (Repl. 2013) (Class D). His counsel has moved to withdraw under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Rule 4-3(b) of the Rules of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, with a brief that demonstrates no unfavorable ruling in the record could be a meritorious ground to appeal. We agree, grant the motion to withdraw, and affirm. The written conditions of probation Brown signed and initialed 30 July 2021 included that he “must obey all federal and state laws, local ordinances, and court orders.” By the March 2025 revocation hearing, the State represented in a petition and two supplemental petitions to revoke that he had been arrested and charged in December 2022 with possessing methamphetamine, marijuana, and drug paraphernalia; in February 2023 with possessing more than ten grams of methamphetamine or cocaine and other drugs with purpose to deliver; and in May 2023 with rape and human trafficking. In September 2024, he pleaded guilty in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas to possessing at least fifty grams of methamphetamine on or about 20 February 2023. Brown admitted in a painstaking colloquy with the Honorable D. Price Marshall Jr. that he had possessed fifty-eight grams of methamphetamine with the intent to sell and use it. The State introduced the federal guilty-plea transcript without objection at the revocation hearing. In other words, Brown was dead to rights. Because the State had “already got adequate independent grounds” to revoke in those plea-hearing admissions, his counsel objected when the State then announced it would call a witness to testify about the rape and sex-trafficking offense alleged in a supplemental petition to revoke. The court overruled the objection—correctly, as counsel demonstrates, because a defendant cannot prevent the State from introducing relevant evidence even by conceding to the facts of a crime. Williams v. State, 374 Ark. 282, 287 S.W.3d 559 (2008). The State is entitled to prove its case as conclusively as it can, Regalado v. State, 331 Ark. 326, 961 S.W.2d 739 (1998), including by proving more of the pending allegations in a petition to revoke than it might ultimately need. The witness, who was then fifteen years old, testified that Brown had given her ecstasy or marijuana and raped her vaginally and orally at least four times despite knowing— 2 and acknowledging he knew—she was only fourteen at the time. The first time, he pistol- whipped her. The State rested; Brown did not testify. Brown’s counsel acknowledged the State’s request for a long revocation sentence but asked the court to impose a ten-year sentence to parallel the sentence the parties had agreed to recommend in the federal case. Of course, that was a different case, in a different court, involving a different incident charged under different laws. And the sentence had only been recommended, not imposed. The circuit court was not persuaded: All right. Thank you. The court today is concerned not only with the incident that occurred with this young lady but also with the number of times that he’s been in the system and gotten off lightly and continues to reoffend. His criminal history shows that there was a 2006 and 2009, or at least according to this transcript which wasn’t contest[ed], aggravated burglaries, 2016 possession with intent to distribute, ’21 a felon in possession, ’22 possession with intent to distribute, then these new federal charges and now this incident. It appears to me that the defendant is not going to stop and doesn’t take the threats from the system seriously. That leaves the court no alternative but to order a lengthy prison term. So, Mr. Brown, the court hereby sentences you to 30 years in the Arkansas Department of Corrections. As withdrawing counsel acknowledges, the circuit court’s discretion to impose a revocation sentence within the statutory limits of the original offenses is well settled. Harden v. State, 2023 Ark. App. 361, 676 S.W.3d 4. Though the original sentencing order included a hiccup, 1 the amended sentencing order entered 16 May 2025 imposes a lawful sentence 1 The court’s 6 March 2025 sentencing order imposed a 360-month revocation sentence on Count 1, possession of a firearm by certain persons under Ark. Code Ann. § 5- 73-103(c), to run consecutively to 60-month sentences on the other counts. But that 3 for the offenses of conviction—a 240-month sentence on count one, to be served consecutively to the 60-month sentences on the other two counts. There could be no merit in an appeal of that sentence on this record. To the extent the circuit court’s pretrial rulings were adverse to Brown, we agree with withdrawing counsel that they could not be a meritorious ground for appeal, either. Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted. BARRETT and BROWN, JJ., agree. The Law Offices of John Wesley Hall, by: Samantha J. Carpenter, for appellant. One brief only. conviction was a Class B felony. The maximum imprisonment sentence for a Class B felony is twenty years. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-401(a)(3) (Repl. 2024). 4