Coble v. State , 2017 Ark. App. 14 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                    Cite as 
    2017 Ark. App. 14
    ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
    DIVISION III
    No. CR-16-69
    TRIVA COBLE                                         Opinion Delivered   January 18, 2017
    APPELLANT
    APPEAL FROM THE GARLAND
    COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
    V.                                                  [NO. 26CR-13-72-1]
    HONORABLE JOHN HOMER
    STATE OF ARKANSAS                                   WRIGHT, JUDGE
    APPELLEE
    AFFIRMED; MOTION TO
    WITHDRAW GRANTED
    PHILLIP T. WHITEAKER, Judge
    Triva Lynn Coble appeals a Garland County Circuit Court order revoking her
    probation and sentencing her to eighteen years in the Arkansas Department of Correction.
    Appellate counsel has filed a motion with this court to be relieved as counsel pursuant to
    Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), and Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(k) (2016).
    The motion is accompanied by a no-merit brief containing an abstract and addendum of the
    proceedings below. The abstract and addendum in counsel’s brief include all objections and
    motions decided adversely to appellant, and counsel explains in the argument portion of his
    brief why there is nothing in the record that would arguably support an appeal. The clerk of
    this court provided appellant with a copy of counsel’s brief and motion and notified appellant
    of her right to file pro se points for reversal. Appellant has filed pro se points for reversal, and
    Cite as 
    2017 Ark. App. 14
    the State has filed a response. We affirm appellant’s revocation and grant counsel’s motion to
    withdraw.
    A request to be relieved as counsel on the ground that the appeal is wholly without
    merit shall be accompanied by a brief including an abstract and addendum. Ark. Sup. Ct. R.
    4-3(k)(1). The brief shall contain an argument section that consists of a list of all rulings
    adverse to the defendant made by the trial court with an explanation as to why each adverse
    ruling is not a meritorious ground for reversal. 
    Id. In furtherance
    of the goal of protecting
    constitutional rights, it is both the duty of counsel and of this court to perform a full
    examination of the proceedings as a whole to decide if an appeal would be wholly frivolous.
    Campbell v. State, 
    74 Ark. App. 277
    , 
    47 S.W.3d 915
    (2001).
    From our review of the record and the brief presented to us, including consideration
    of appellant’s pro se points for reversal, which are either not preserved for appeal or do not
    otherwise support reversal, we find compliance with Rule 4-3(k) and that there is no merit
    to an appeal. Therefore, we affirm, by memorandum opinion, appellant’s revocation. See In
    re Memorandum Opinions, 
    16 Ark. App. 301
    , 
    700 S.W.2d 63
    (1985). We also grant counsel’s
    motion to withdraw.
    Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted.
    GLOVER and BROWN, JJ., agree.
    Paul J. Teufel, for appellant.
    Leslie Rutledge, Att’y Gen., by: Rachel Kemp, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: CR-16-69

Citation Numbers: 2017 Ark. App. 14

Judges: Phillip T. Whiteaker

Filed Date: 1/18/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/18/2017