Webb v. State (Majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 637 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II No. CR-14-279 Opinion Delivered November 12, 2014 MICHAEL WEBB, JR. APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE DREW COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. CR-2010-162-3A] V. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE HONORABLE ROBERT BYNUM GIBSON, JR., JUDGE SUPPLEMENTAL ADDENDUM ORDERED RITA W. GRUBER, Judge Michael Webb, Jr., appeals the circuit court’s revocation of his probation. He raises two points, contending (1) that the court’s finding that he violated terms of his probation by constructively possessing a firearm and drugs was clearly against the preponderance of the evidence, and (2) that his due-process rights were violated because the court considered matters that were not contained in the State’s petition to revoke. The State responds that the court did not err by finding that Webb violated terms of his probation;1 it does not respond to the second point. We remand for supplementation of the addendum to Webb’s brief because it lacks important pages of the 2013 sentencing order. Without these pages, we are unable to confirm that this is indeed a revocation case or to ascertain the underlying offenses. See Ark. Sup. Ct. 1 The State’s argument simply asserts that we should affirm the circuit court’s finding that appellant constructively possessed the drugs and the firearm. Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 637 R. 4-2(a)(8)(A)(i) (2014) (requiring that the addendum to appellant’s brief include the order from which the appeal is taken). We order Webb to file, within seven calendar days of this opinion, a supplemental addendum providing the relevant pages from the record. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(4) (2014). We also encourage review of our rules to ensure that no other deficiencies are present. WALMSLEY and HARRISON, JJ., agree. Timothy R. Leonard, for appellant. Dustin McDaniel, Att’y Gen., by: Nicana C. Sherman, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
