[1, 2] A plea of guilty, coupled with a fine and probation, constitutes a conviction. Carter v. State, 350 Ark. 229, 85 S.W.3d 914 (2002). It is well settled that a trial court loses jurisdiction to modify or amend an original sentence once a valid sentence is executed. Id. (citing Bagwell v. State, 346 Ark. 18, 53 S.W.3d 520 (2001); Pike v. State, 344 Ark. 478, 70 S.W.3d 795 [ 40 S.W.3d 795] (2001); McGhee v. State, 334 Ark. 543, 975 S.W.2d 834 (1998); Harmon v. State, 317 Ark. 47, 876 S.W.2d 240 (1994)).

Ordinarily, the court's jurisdiction to revoke probation ends when probation ends. Carter v. State, 350 Ark. 229, 234, 85 S.W.3d 914, 917 (2002). But Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-93-308 (Supp. 2023) extends the court's jurisdiction to revoke for a "violation of probation" if, before the probation term ends, (1) the defendant is arrested for a violation; (2) a warrant is issued for the defendant's arrest for a violation; (3) a petition to revoke the defendant's probation has been filed, if an arrest warrant is issued within thirty days; or (4) the defendant has been issued either a citation in lieu of arrest under Ark. R. Crim. P. 5 or served a summons under Ark. R. Crim. P. 6 for a violation.

2001) (in relevant parts unchanged from the Repl. 1993 version of the section relied upon by the State), a trial court can revoke probation "subsequent to the expiration of the period of suspension or probation, provided the defendant is arrested for violation of . . . probation, or a warrant is issued for his arrest for violation of suspension or probation, before expiration of the period." 3. CRIMINAL LAW — ARK. CODE ANN. § 5-4-309(e) — CIRCUIT COURT LOSES JURISDICTION TO REVOKE PROBATION WHERE PROBATION PERIOD HAS EXPIRED WITHOUT ARREST FOR VIOLATION. — Pursuant to Carter v. State, 350 Ark. 229, 85 S.W.3d 914 (2002) the circuit court loses jurisdiction to revoke probation under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-309(e) when the probation period has expired without the probationer's having been arrested for a probation violation and without an arrest warrant having been issued for violation of probation. 4. ARREST — REVOCATION OCCURRED AFTER PROBATIONARY TERM HAD EXPIRED WHERE APPELLANT HAD NOT BEEN ARRESTED DURING PROBATION PERIOD FOR MATTERS RELATING TO HIS PROBATION — CIRCUIT COURT DID NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO REVOKE APPELLANT'S PROBATION. — Appellant was not arrested for a violation of his probation conditions within the meaning of Carter and its interpretation of Arkansas Code Ann. § 5-4-309(e); appellant was arrested pursuant to an alias warrant issued during his probationary period and the warrant was issued well within the probation period, and appellant was arrested during the probationary period; however, the alias warrant cited as reason for the arrest possession of a controlled substance, and not

, I agree the Eighth Amendment standard should apply. See Carter v. State, 85 S.W.3d 914, 916 (Ark. 2002) (“A plea of guilty, coupled with a fine and probation, constitutes a conviction” under Arkansas law).

, I agree the Eighth Amendment standard should apply. See Carter v. State, 85 S.W.3d 914, 916 (Ark. 2002) (“A plea of guilty, coupled with a fine and probation, constitutes a conviction” under Arkansas law).

As a criminal statute, section 5-4-603 must be strictly construed in favor of the accused. Carter v. State, 350 Ark. 229, 85 S.W.3d 914 (2002). In connection with the statutory requirements for the imposition of the death penalty, the Arkansas Model Jury Instructions — Criminal for the punishment phase of a capital murder case include four separate verdict forms: Form 1 — the jury's findings concerning possible aggravating circumstances; Form 2 — the jury's findings concerning possible mitigating circumstances; Form 3 — the jury's weighing of any aggravating or mitigating circumstances; and Form 4 — the jury's sentence of death or life without the possibility of parole.

This court has stated that "without another statutory provision conferring jurisdiction, `the jurisdictional statements contained in §§ 41-1208 and 41-1209 [now §§ 5-4-309 and 5-4-310] control [revocation of probation].'" Carter v. State, 350 Ark. 229, 233, 85 S.W.3d 914, 916-17 (2002) (quoting Gill v. State, 290 Ark. 1, 3, 716 S.W.2d 746, 747 (1986)). Therefore, resolution of Mr. Harness's point on appeal involves an issue of statutory interpretation.

We have explained that a plea of guilty, coupled with a fine and probation, constitutes a conviction. Carter v. State, 350 Ark. 229, 85 S.W.3d 914 (2002); David v. State, 286 Ark. 205, 691 S.W.2d 133 (1985). Appellee pleaded guilty to manufacturing a controlled substance in violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-401.

Although this issue was not raised by the parties, we note that the trial court had jurisdiction to revoke Heathman's probation because a warrant had been issued for her arrest before the probationary period expired. See Ark. Code Ann. § 16-93-308(f)(2) (Supp. 2021); Carter v. State, 350 Ark. 229, 85 S.W.3d 914 (2002). We further note that Heathman's revocation hearing was not held within sixty days after her arrest pursuant to section 16-93-307(b)(2) (Repl. 2016); however, Heathman did not raise any objection below and thus waived the requirement.

But whether a circuit court may revoke probation after expiration of the probation period is a question of jurisdiction. Carter v. State, 350 Ark. 229, 85 S.W.3d 914 (2002). A circuit court's loss of jurisdiction over a defendant "is always open, cannot be waived, can be questioned for the first time on appeal, and can even be raised by this court."