Henderson v. State — Arkansas appeals court strikes repeat court costs and booking fees after probation revocations

Case
Frederick Henderson v. State of Arkansas
Court
Arkansas Court of Appeals, Division IV
Judge
Brandon J. Harrison; Murphy; Klappenbach
Date Decided
September 2, 2026
Docket No.
CR-25-318
Topics
Probation revocation; Illegal sentence; Court costs; Criminal fees
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Frederick Henderson was placed on probation in 2019. After several revocations, the Miller County Circuit Court revoked his probation again in February 2025, imposed five years’ imprisonment, and ordered him to pay newly assessed costs and fees as well as all previously assessed financial obligations.

The resulting assessments included $750 in court costs, $180 in booking fees, and $500 in bailiff fees. Henderson, who had been homeless since at least 2019, challenged the sentence as illegal after the court previously denied counsel’s Anders motion and directed briefing on the repeat assessments.

The Court’s Holding

The Arkansas Court of Appeals held that the circuit court could impose the statutory $150 court cost and booking fee only once in this criminal case—not anew at each probation revocation. A revocation proceeding determines whether a probation violation is true and permits modification of the original sentence; it does not create a new conviction or a new guilty plea.

The court therefore reversed the repeated court-cost and booking-fee assessments and remanded for an amended order imposing a $150 court cost and a $20 booking fee. It affirmed the $500 aggregate bailiff assessment, treating it as a mandatory fine authorized by uncodified Act 1741 of 2003 for Miller County. The court expressed no view on that Act’s constitutionality because no party raised the issue.

Key Takeaways

  • Probation revocation is not a new criminal conviction.
  • Statutory court costs and booking fees may not be repeatedly imposed through successive revocations of the same case.
  • The court upheld the recurring $100 Miller County bailiff fines under uncodified Act 1741.

Why It Matters

The decision limits the accumulation of court costs and booking fees in Arkansas probation-revocation cases. It also reinforces that an illegal sentence may be challenged despite the lack of a contemporaneous objection or appeal from earlier sentencing orders incorporated into the judgment on appeal.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top