Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 453
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II
No. CR-25-599
ORLANDO STEGALL Opinion Delivered September 30, 2026
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE CRAIGHEAD
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
V. WESTERN DISTRICT
[NOS. 16JCR-14-698; 16JCR-19-297;
16JCR-19-473]
STATE OF ARKANSAS
APPELLEE
HONORABLE SCOTT A. ELLINGTON,
JUDGE
AFFIRMED
WENDY SCHOLTENS WOOD, Judge
Orlando Stegall appeals the Craighead County Circuit Court’s orders revoking his
probation in three separate cases and imposing an aggregate sentence of thirty years’
imprisonment. On appeal, Stegall argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the
revocations. We affirm.
On July 1, 2016, Stegall pled guilty to second-degree domestic battering in 16JCR-14-698 and was sentenced to sixty months’ probation. After Stegall was arrested in 2019 for
sexual acts with his stepdaughter, the State filed a petition to revoke his probation. The
petition was dismissed on August 5, 2019. That same day, Stegall pled guilty to one count of
second-degree sexual assault in 16JCR-19-297 and one count of second-degree sexual assault
in 16JCR-19-473. The court sentenced him to three years’ probation on each conviction.
On August 30, the State petitioned to revoke Stegall’s probation in all three cases;
Stegall pled guilty to the revocation petition; and the circuit court entered new sentencing
orders on November 5, 2020, sentencing him to five years’ probation for each conviction.
The conditions of probation for all three guilty pleas included the requirements that Stegall
not commit a criminal offense punishable by imprisonment; report to a supervising officer;
pay imposed fees, fines, and costs; and comply with all sex-offender-registration statutes and
requirements.
The State filed a petition to revoke probation in all three cases on February 22, 2023,
and an amended petition on May 12. The State alleged that Stegall committed the offenses
of filing a false report; leaving the scene of an accident; failing to report to probation as
directed; failing to appear; failing to notify probation of his address; failing to comply with
sex-offender registration and reporting requirements; and failing to pay court-ordered fees,
fines, and costs.
The circuit court held a revocation hearing on May 16, 2023. The State presented the
testimony of Calvin Montgomery, who said he was home on May 10, 2022, with his daughter
and grandchildren when he heard a loud “boom,” ran into the front room, and saw a car
“hanging” in the room. He went outside and saw a man whom he identified at the hearing
as Stegall. Stegall asked Calvin not to call the police, but police and firetrucks arrived
immediately thereafter. Stegall fled the scene. Calvin’s wife, Sharon Montgomery, testified
that when she arrived home, there was a car “through [her] front room.” She said they
2
incurred $3,675 in costs to replace two televisions and everything in the front room that had
been damaged.
Officer Trevor Sutton of the Jonesboro Police Department testified that Stegall came
to the police department that evening to report the vehicle that hit the Montgomerys’ home
had been stolen earlier in the day. According to Officer Sutton, Stegall changed his story a
few times about from where and from whom it had been stolen.
Detective Chad Hoggard of the Jonesboro Police Department testified that he was
assigned to investigate the case for leaving the scene of an accident and vehicle theft. He
obtained video footage of the incident, saw Stegall on the video walking away from the car
that he had reported stolen, and put a warrant out for his arrest when he was unable to find
him. After Stegall was arrested, he provided a statement to Detective Hoggard admitting that
he was in the car, but he claimed he was not driving.
Becky Mahan, the fine and fee collector for the Craighead County Sheriff’s
Department, testified that Stegall owed $500 in fines in 16JCR-14-0698 and had never made
a payment. She said that Stegall had voluntarily made only one payment of $50 in 2020 in
the two sexual-assault cases: 16JCR-19-297 and 16CJR-19-473. She said that the State had
applied Stegall’s state tax refunds of $71.10 in 2021 and $179 in 2022 to the amount owed,
leaving a balance of $1,499.90 for the two sexual-assault convictions.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the circuit court found Stegall had violated the
conditions of his probation in all three cases by failing to pay fines and fees, filing a false
report, leaving the scene of an accident, and failing to maintain the sex-offender-registration
3
requirements. The court entered a sentencing order in each case on May 18, 2023, revoking
Stegall’s probation and sentencing him to consecutive terms of fifteen years’ imprisonment
for the sexual-assault convictions and five years’ imprisonment on the domestic-battering
conviction, to run concurrently with the sexual-assault convictions. Stegall appealed.
The State has the burden of proving the defendant violated a condition of his
probation; however, it must establish only one violation to sustain the revocation. Sivils v.
State, 2021 Ark. App. 198, at 3, 623 S.W.3d 138, 140. This court will not reverse a circuit
court’s decision to revoke a suspended sentence unless the decision is clearly against the
preponderance of the evidence. Walls v. State, 2023 Ark. App. 49, at 4, 659 S.W.3d 741,
743. A preponderance of the evidence is convincing evidence that is more probably accurate
and true when weighed against the evidence opposed to it. Sivils, 2021 Ark. App. 198, at 3,
623 S.W.3d at 140. Decisions about the preponderance of evidence turn on the credibility
and weight of the testimony and evidence, and these are matters on which we defer to the
circuit court because it is in a superior position to view the testimony and evidence firsthand.
Walls, 2023 Ark. App. 49, at 4, 659 S.W.3d at 744.
Stegall challenges all grounds on which the court revoked his probation, but the State
needed to prove only one violation. The court first found that Stegall had failed to pay courtordered fines and fees. Stegall argues that the evidence is insufficient to support this finding
because the State did not show that his failure to pay was willful. It is the State’s burden to
prove that the failure to pay was inexcusable. Alexander v. State, 2018 Ark. App. 466, at 4,
561 S.W.3d 744, 746. Once the State has introduced evidence of nonpayment, the burden
4
of going forward shifts to the defendant to offer some reasonable excuse for failing to pay.
Vail v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 407, at 3, 438 S.W.3d 286, 288. It is then the defendant’s
obligation to justify the failure to pay by providing evidence of a reasonable excuse for the
nonpayment. Id., 438 S.W.3d at 288. The defendant may not “sit back and rely totally upon
the [circuit] court to make inquiry into his excuse for nonpayment.” Alexander, 2018 Ark.
App. 466, at 4, 561 S.W.3d at 746. While the ultimate burden of proving inexcusable
nonpayment remains on the State, if the defendant fails to demonstrate a reasonable
explanation for his failure to pay, then it is difficult to find clear error in a circuit court’s
finding of inexcusable nonpayment. Springs v. State, 2017 Ark. App. 364, at 4, 525 S.W.3d
490, 493.
Here, Stegall argues that his probation officer said that Stegall had been incarcerated
several times during his probation, which Stegall now claims “clearly would have precluded
him from being able to make his court ordered payments.” However, Stegall neither testified
about nor introduced any evidence to demonstrate when he was incarcerated, the length of
his incarceration, or how this prevented him from making payments. He offered no
argument or explanation at all of this “incarceration excuse” to the circuit court. Indeed,
Stegall’s counsel made only a general argument in closing that the State had failed to prove
that he had violated his probation. He offered no evidence supporting Stegall’s excuse for
his failure to pay his fines, fees, and costs. Therefore, we hold that the circuit court did not
err in finding that nonpayment of fees and fines supported the revocation and that its finding
5
was not clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. See, e.g., Wilcox v. State, 2021 Ark.
App. 244, at 5, 624 S.W.3d 353, 356–57.
Because only one violation is required to sustain a revocation and the State
sufficiently proved to the circuit court that Stegall failed to pay his court-ordered fines and
fees, we do not address the additional grounds for the circuit court’s decision to revoke
Stegall’s probation.
Affirmed.
TUCKER and HIXSON, JJ., agree.
Matthew Lunce, Craighead County Public Defender’s Office, for appellant.
Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Mallory Wood, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.
6