Full Opinion

Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 442 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CR-25-616 HERIBERTO JUNIOR TRISTANIS Opinion Delivered September 30, 2026 APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE WASHINGTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT V. [NOS. 72CR-19-3261, 72CR-22-87, 72CR- 23-1621, 72CR-23-1970] STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE HONORABLE JOANNA TAYLOR, JUDGE AFFIRMED RAYMOND R. ABRAMSON, Judge Heriberto Junior Tristanis appeals following the revocation of his probation by the Washington County Circuit Court. On appeal, Tristanis argues that the circuit court erred by finding that he violated a condition of his probation. We affirm. On April 10, 2024, Tristanis was sentenced to a concurrent sentence of seventy-two months’ probation for three counts of possession of methamphetamine, two counts of failure to appear, and two counts of possession of drug paraphernalia in four different cases. The conditions of his probation included that he report to his supervising officer as directed. On August 28, 2025, the State filed an amended petition to revoke Tristanis’s probation in all four cases alleging that he had violated his probation by not reporting to his probation officer, not entering into a transitional-living program, not obtaining mental- health and substance-abuse treatment, not cooperating with his probation officer, not paying his court-ordered obligations, and committing new offenses. On September 3, the court held a revocation hearing. At the hearing, Ryan Stanger testified that he had been Tristanis’s probation officer since June 2024. Stanger explained that Tristanis participated in community service on May 28 but did not report after that date. Stanger stated that he conducted a home visit at Tristanis’s registered address on June 20, but he could not locate him. He explained that he then filed a violation report for absconding on July 5, and about a week after he filed the report, Tristanis was arrested for a “possession charge” and was in jail until November 27. Stanger stated that after Tristanis was released from jail, he started reporting again but did not report on March 10, April 1, and May 9, 2025. Stanger further testified that Tristanis did not enter a transitional-living program or receive substance-abuse treatment as required by his probation. He stated that Tristanis had outstanding fines and fees totaling about $347, and he noted that Tristanis had reported earning $500 a week from employment. Stanger said that Tristanis was uncooperative and unresponsive during meetings. On cross-examination, Stanger acknowledged that Tristanis had “bounced back and forth between homelessness, staying around 7 Hills and occasionally being at Salvation Army.” Stanger testified that Tristanis “couldn’t tell me where his money was going or why he couldn’t pay his fees.” He noted that Tristanis had completed community-service hours that applied to his fees and fines. No other witnesses testified. 2 At the conclusion of the hearing, the court found that Tristanis had violated his probation by failing to report, failing to pay his court-order obligations, not living at his registered address, being uncooperative and dishonest with his probation officer, not entering a transitional-living program, and not obtaining mental-health treatment. The court revoked his probation and sentenced him to thirty-six months’ imprisonment. This appeal followed. In a revocation proceeding, the circuit court must find by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant has inexcusably failed to comply with a condition of his probation, and on appellate review, we do not reverse the circuit court’s decision unless it is clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. Flemons v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 131; Ark. Code Ann. § 16-93-308(d) (Supp. 2023). Because the burdens are different, evidence that is insufficient for a criminal conviction may be sufficient for a probation or suspended-sentence revocation. Bradley v. State, 347 Ark. 518, 65 S.W.3d 874 (2002). Since a determination of a preponderance of the evidence turns on questions of credibility and weight to be given testimony, we defer to the circuit court’s superior position. Id. Furthermore, the State need only prove that the appellant committed one violation of the conditions to revoke appellant’s sentence. Peals v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 1, 453 S.W.3d 151. On appeal, Tristanis argues that the circuit court erred by finding that he inexcusably violated a condition of his probation, and he first challenges the circuit court’s finding that he did not report to his probation officer. He asserts that even though he missed some 3 appointments, he reported on other occasions, and he argues that he missed and failed to make up only his April 2025 appointment. We find Tristanis’s argument unpersuasive. The probation officer testified that Tristanis did not report on March 10, April 1, and May 9, 2025. Even though Tristanis resumed reporting intermittently, he did not report as directed. See McGahey v. State, 2024 Ark. App. 30, 683 S.W.3d 211. Given these circumstances, we hold that a preponderance of the evidence supports the circuit court’s revocation of Tristanis’s probation for failing to report to his probation officer. Because the State need only show that Tristanis committed one violation to sustain a revocation, we decline to address his arguments concerning the other bases for the court’s revocation. Id. Affirmed. KLAPPENBACH, C.J., and VIRDEN, J., agree. The Lane Firm, by: Jonathan T. Lane, for appellant. Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Rebecca Kane, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee. 4