Bryan Tanksley v. State of Arkansas

── Bryan Tanksley v. State of Arkansas ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas Date: May 20, 2026 Category: General Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 322 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II No. CR-25-644 Opinion Delivered May 20, 2026 BRYAN TANKSLEY APPEAL FROM THE ASHLEY APPELLANT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 02CR-24-58] V. HONORABLE ROBERT B. STATE OF ARKANSAS GIBSON III, JUDGE APPELLEE AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge Bryan Tanksley appeals his convictions for possession of a controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia. Tanksley’s attorney has filed a no-merit brief and a motion to withdraw as counsel pursuant to Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(b)(1) (2025) and Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that the appeal is wholly without merit. The clerk of this court mailed a copy of counsel’s motion and brief to Tanksley’s last-known address informing him of his right to file pro se points for reversal, but he has not done so. We affirm the convictions and grant the motion to withdraw. In a criminal information filed 22 March 2024, the State charged Tanksley as a habitual offender with possession of a controlled substance (morphine) and possession of drug paraphernalia, both Class D felonies. (02CR-24-58) On 23 April 2024, the court released him from the custody of the Ashley County Detention Center so he could begin 1 substance-abuse treatment at Covenant Recovery, Inc. On 18 June 2025, Tanksley pled guilty to both charges but had his sentence decided by a jury. During jury selection, defense counsel objected because three of the four jurors struck by the State were African American. The State responded that the jurors had been struck because they attended church with Daniel Shelton, a peer-support specialist who referred Tanksley to Covenant Recovery and who was an expected witness for the defense. The court overruled the objection and stated, “[I]t would be almost malpractice if they were not struck by the State given Mr. Shelton’s stature in the community and that they go to church together.” Tim Sivils, a parole officer for the Arkansas Department of Correction, testified that he and two police officers conducted a home visit on Tanksley on 14 March 2024. Tanksley had been released on parole on or about 2 January 2024, and he was told to report to the Crossett probation and parole office on January 8. At that appointment, Tanksley tested positive for methamphetamine and amphetamines. His parole officer scheduled a substance- abuse assessment for Tanksley on January 13, but he failed to appear. He also failed to report to his next office visit on February 13. He later reported on February 26, received a verbal warning for failure to report, and was assigned another appointment for a substance-abuse assessment on March 8. However, he failed to report to that assessment. Sivils also testified that controlled substances have had a “devastating” effect on Ashley County and that he had seen things worse than what he had witnessed when deployed in Iraq. After describing several examples, defense counsel objected on relevance grounds; the court overruled the objection, noting that the testimony was “specifically 2 relevant as to what the issue is and how it impacts, not only the community, but the individuals involved. . . . And how it impacts the community is something that the jury is entitled to consider.” Josh Pollock, an investigator with the Ashley County S