Court of Appeals

Decision Information

Decision Content

Cite as 2020 Ark. App. 402 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION I No. CR-20-49

JAQUALEYN DEMOND GOODWIN APPELLANT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT V.

HONORABLE CHARLES E. STATE OF ARKANSAS CLAWSON, JR., JUDGE APPELLEE APPEAL DISMISSED N. MARK KLAPPENBACH, Judge Appellant Jaqualeyn Demond Goodwin was on probation for forgery when the State filed a petition to revoke, alleging that Goodwin violated the conditions of his probation. At the hearing on the petition, Goodwin entered a guilty plea, admitting that he had failed to report as ordered and tested positive for drugs. The circuit court entered a sentencing order pursuant to the guilty plea and sentenced Goodwin to three years in prison. Goodwin filed a timely notice of appeal. Because we lack jurisdiction over the appeal of this guilty plea, we dismiss the appeal. As a general rule, one may not appeal from an order entered pursuant to a guilty plea. Burgess v. State, 2016 Ark. 175, 490 S.W.3d 645. The rule applies equally to pleas entered to revocation petitions. See McJoy v. State, 2016 Ark. App. 337. Essentially, there are three exceptions to the general rule: (1) when one enters a conditional guilty plea and retains the right to argue one of the specific issues in Ark. R. Crim. P. 24.3(b); (2) when

Opinion Delivered September 16, 2020 APPEAL FROM THE FAULKNER [NO. 23CR-18-721]

there is a challenge to evidence presented in a sentencing hearing separate from the plea itself; and (3) when the assignment of error is from a sentence or sentencing procedure that was not an integral part of the acceptance of the plea. Id. We find nothing in this record that would bring Goodwin’s case within any of the exceptions to the general rule of nonappealability of a guilty plea. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal. See Bates v. State, 2017 Ark. App. 11. Appeal dismissed. HARRISON and HIXSON, JJ., agree. Terry Goodwin Jones, for appellant. Leslie Rutledge, Att’y Gen., by: David L. Eanes, Jr., Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.

2

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.