The opinion
Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 181
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION IV
No. CR-25-405
CHEYANNA SPANN Opinion Delivered March 11, 2026
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE CONWAY
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
V. [NO. 15CR-23-245]
STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE JERRY DON RAMEY,
APPELLEE JUDGE
AFFIRMED
WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge
The Conway County Circuit Court revoked appellant Cheyanna Spann’s probation
for the underlying charge of possession of less than two grams of methamphetamine or
cocaine, a Class D felony. Appellant was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment. She argues
on appeal that the evidence was insufficient to support the revocation. We affirm.
Appellant negotiated a plea of guilty to the above charge in May 2024. She was placed
on four years’ probation and given certain conditions that she had to follow while on
probation: she was prohibited from committing a criminal offense punishable by
imprisonment, she was prohibited from using or possessing any controlled substance without
a legitimate prescription from a physician, and she must pay all court-ordered fees, fines, and
costs. The State filed a petition to revoke appellant’s probation on November 12, alleging
that appellant had violated the terms and conditions of her probation by committing felony
theft on September 2, by admitting to marijuana use on or about September 3, and by not
paying her court-ordered fees and fines.
Appellant’s revocation hearing took place on January 8, 2025. Chelsea Sheltka,
appellant’s probation officer, testified that appellant had not paid her court-ordered fines
and fees and that she currently owed over $100 in supervision fees; that appellant admitted
using marijuana in September 2024; and that appellant had a new felony charge. Sheltka
stated that appellant had admitted she was guilty of the theft. Officer Anthony Taylor of the
Conway Police Department testified that he arrested appellant at Walmart on September 2,
2024, for theft. He stated that appellant was seen changing the price stickers on items and
going through self-checkout without ringing up all the items in her cart. He said that
appellant paid $5 for items valued over $380. He admitted that the theft would normally be
a misdemeanor based on the amount stolen, but it was a felony because appellant has a prior
felony theft conviction. Darlene Massingill, the Conway County Circuit Clerk, testified that
appellant owed a balance of $2,240 and that she had not made any payments. Appellant
testified that she had never appeared in court for the theft, and that she had not made any
payments because she could not find a job. She admitted that she notified her probation
officer that she had smoked marijuana.
2
The circuit court found that appellant had violated the terms and conditions of her
probation as alleged by the State1 and subsequently revoked appellant’s probation.
Appellant was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment in the sentencing ordered filed on
January 8, 2025.2 Appellant filed a notice of appeal on February 5.
In probation-revocation proceedings, the State has the burden of proving that
appellant violated the terms of his probation as alleged in the revocation petition by a
preponderance of the evidence, and this court will not reverse the circuit court’s decision to
revoke probation unless it is clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. 3 The State
need only show that the appellant committed one violation in order to sustain a revocation. 4
Appellant admitted during the revocation hearing that she told her probation officer
she had used marijuana. This was sufficient to support her revocation.5 Appellant’s counsel
argues, without citation to authority, that it was the State’s burden to prove that appellant
did not have a prescription for the marijuana; however, he is mistaken. Once the State
showed that appellant had violated the terms and conditions of her probation by using
1
The circuit court found that appellant’s theft was more of a misdemeanor, not a
felony, but was still punishable by incarceration.
2
There was an amended sentencing order filed on February 6, but it had no
substantive changes.
3
Maxwell v. State, 2009 Ark. App. 533, 336 S.W.3d 881.
4
Id.
5
See Farris v. State, 2024 Ark. App. 188, 686 S.W.3d 602.
3
marijuana, it was up to appellant to offer either a defense or a prescription. However,
appellant never presented the circuit court with a prescription, and she never claimed to
have a prescription for marijuana. Accordingly, we affirm.
Affirmed.
ABRAMSON and THYER, JJ., agree.
Lassiter & Cassinelli, by: Michael Kiel Kaiser, for appellant.
Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Dalton Cook, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.
4