Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 328
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION I
No. CR-15-786
OPINION DELIVERED JUNE 22, 2016
LACRESHA N. PUGH-HAYES APPEAL FROM THE BRADLEY
APPELLANT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
[NO. CR-2005-82-1]
V.
HONORABLE SAM POPE,
JUDGE
STATE OF ARKANSAS
APPELLEE REBRIEFING ORDERED
ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Chief Judge
On September 11, 2006, in the Bradley County Circuit Court, appellant Lacresha
Pugh-Hayes pled guilty to violating the Arkansas hot check law. She was granted probation
for a period of ten years, with five years supervised and five years unsupervised. Appellant
was charged with committing the offense of third degree domestic battery on or about
March 6, 2014. On August 25, 2014, appellant again appeared before the Bradley County
Circuit Court and pled guilty to the domestic-battery charge. Her sentencing was deferred
for twelve months, with the term ending on August 25, 2015, if she strictly complied with
the ordered conditions.
The State initially filed a petition to revoke on September 4, 2012, alleging that
appellant was in violation because she failed to report as required; failed to pay supervision
fees; failed to pay court costs; and failed to pay restitution. An order to show cause was
Cite as 2016 Ark. App.
issued the same day. On August 28, 2014, the trial court rescinded the order to show cause
and allowed appellant to continue making payments.
The State filed new petitions to revoke with amended violation reports on February
12, April 2, and May 22, 2015. The hearing on July 20, 2015, was the final hearing regarding
allegations of violating her probation terms. On July 20, 2015, the trial court found that
appellant was in violation of the probation terms, revoked her probation, and sentenced
appellant to six years in the Arkansas Department of Correction.
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Rule 4-3(k) of the Rules
of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, Hayes’s counsel filed a motion to
withdraw, arguing that an appeal in this case is wholly without merit. This type of motion
must be accompanied by an abstract and a brief referring to everything in the record that
might arguably support an appeal, including all motions, objections, and requests decided
adversely to appellant, as well as a statement of reasons why none of those rulings would be
a meritorious ground for reversal. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(k). Hayes was provided with a copy
of her counsel’s brief and was notified of her right to file a list of points on appeal within
thirty days, but she has not done so.
Hayes’s counsel states in her brief that there were only two adverse rulings at the
revocation hearing—the revocation itself and appellant’s request for two weeks to surrender
into custody. However, our review of the record reveals that appellant filed multiple
pleadings pro se subsequent to the revocation hearing that were neither ruled on by the
circuit court nor addressed by Hayes’s counsel. Based on these omissions, we order
rebriefing in accordance with Anders, supra, and Rule 4-3(k).
2
Cite as 2016 Ark. App.
Additionally, we note that these postrevocation pleadings, which include a motion
for rehearing, a motion for release on bond for emergency consideration, and a motion for
discovery are not included in the addendum. Rule 4-2(a)(8) (2015) of the Arkansas Supreme
Court and Court of Appeals requires that an addendum contain all the relevant orders,
pleadings, documents, and exhibits in the record that are essential to an understanding of
the case.
Based on the above, we order rebriefing and allow Hayes’s counsel thirty additional
days in which to file a substituted brief, abstract, and addendum to cure any and all
deficiencies. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(3).
Rebriefing ordered.
HOOFMAN and BROWN, JJ., agree.
Margo D. Warner, for appellant.
No response.
3