GYEON PORTER v. STATE OF ARKANSAS (Majority)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2023 Ark. App. 420 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CR-23-38 Opinion Delivered September GYEON PORTER V. STATE OF ARKANSAS 27, 2023 APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE CRAIGHEAD COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, WESTERN DISTRICT [NO. 16JCR-21-233] APPELLEE HONORABLE CHRIS THYER, JUDGE AFFIRMED; REMANDED TO CORRECT THE SENTENCING ORDER MIKE MURPHY, Judge Appellant Gyeon Porter appeals the Craighead County Circuit Court’s revocation of his probation. Porter raises the same point on appeal as in Porter v. State, 2023 Ark. App. 419, ___ S.W.3d ____, which is also handed down today. The relevant facts, Porter’s arguments, and this court’s conclusions are set forth in the companion case and are incorporated herein. Accordingly, we affirm the revocation of Porter’s probation. We do, however, remand this case to correct the sentencing order. The sentencing order in case No. 16JCR-21-233 states that Porter was convicted and sentenced for possession of marijuana in violation of Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-64-436(b)(2). Porter, however, had pleaded guilty to possession of drug paraphernalia; the marijuana-possession charges had been nolle prossed. It is clear from the transcript that the court sentenced Porter to six years’ imprisonment in 16JCR-21-233. The only charge in that case was the possession of drug paraphernalia, a Class D felony, for which the maximum sentence is six years. It is clear from this record the mistake is not a result of an exercise of the court’s judicial discretion but from a recording mistake on the part of its officers (or perhaps someone else). Accordingly, we remand to correct the sentencing order. Walls v. State, 2023 Ark. App. 49, at 6, 659 S.W.3d 741, 744. Affirmed; remanded to correct the sentencing order. GLADWIN and GRUBER, JJ., agree. Terry Goodwin Jones, for appellant. Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Adam Jackson, 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.