Roe v. State , 2014 Ark. App. 709 ( 2014 )

Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 709
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION I
No. CR-13-1119
Opinion Delivered December 17, 2014
ADAM DOUGLAS ROE APPEAL FROM THE CRITTENDEN
APPELLANT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. CR-2011-641]
V.
HONORABLE DAVID GOODSON,
STATE OF ARKANSAS JUDGE
APPELLEE
AFFIRMED; MOTION TO
WITHDRAW GRANTED
BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge
Adam Roe appeals from the revocation of his probation and resulting sentence of
three years’ imprisonment. Roe’s attorney has filed a no-merit brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(k)(1) (2013), along with a
motion to withdraw as counsel, asserting that there is no issue of arguable merit for an
appeal. The clerk of our court mailed a certified copy of counsel’s motion and brief to
Roe in accordance with Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(k)(2), informing him of his right to file pro
se points for reversal. Roe has not filed pro se points for reversal, and the State has not
filed a brief. We grant the motion to withdraw and affirm.
The test for filing a no-merit brief is not whether there is any reversible error, but
whether an appeal would be wholly frivolous. Tucker v. State, 47 Ark. App. 96, 885
S.W.2d 904 (1994). Based on our review of the record for potential error pursuant to
Anders and the requirements of Rule 4-3(k), we hold that Roe’s appeal is wholly without
1
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 709
merit. Therefore, pursuant to sections (a) and (b) of In re Memorandum Opinions, 16 Ark.
App. 301, 700 S.W.2d 63 (1985), we issue this memorandum opinion granting counsel’s
motion to withdraw and affirming the court’s revocation.
Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted.
VAUGHT and BROWN, JJ., agree.
Brett D. Watson, Attorney at Law, PLLC, by: Brett D. Watson, for appellant.
No response.
2