Allen Dwayne Buchannan v. State of Arkansas

Arkansas Court of Appeals

Not Designated for Publication

Judge Josephine Linker Hart

DIVISION I

ALLEN DWAYNE BUCHANNAN

APPELLANT

V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

APPELLEE

CACR00-174

December 6, 2000

APPEAL FROM THE CRITTENDEN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

[NO. CR-98-793]

HONORABLE CHARLES DAVID BURNETT, CIRCUIT JUDGE

AFFIRMED

On March 29, 1999, appellant, Allen Dwayne Buchannan, was placed on probation for twenty-four months for possession of cocaine, a Class C felony. On June 7, 1999, the State filed a petition for revocation alleging that appellant violated the conditions of his probation by failing to report to his probation officer; failing to pay probation fees, costs, and fines; possessing and using controlled substances; possessing and using alcohol; fleeing; and blocking a county road. At a hearing held November 3, 1999, the court revoked appellant's probation. According to the judgment and commitment order filed November 12, 1999, appellant was sentenced to forty-eight months in the Arkansas Department of Correction followed by a suspended imposition of sentence for seventy-two months.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Ark. R. Sup. Ct. 4-3(j)(1) (2000), appellant's counsel filed a motion to withdraw as appellant's attorney, alleging thatthis appeal is without merit. Counsel presented a brief purporting to list all rulings adverse to

appellant and explaining why each adverse ruling was not a meritorious ground for reversal. Counsel also prepared an abstract purporting to contain all rulings adverse to appellant along with other material parts of the record. The clerk of this court furnished appellant with a copy of counsel's brief and notified him of his right to file a pro se statement of points for reversal within thirty days. Appellant did not file a statement.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and abstract and agree that none of the rulings adverse to appellant that were abstracted and discussed in the brief provide a meritorious ground for reversal. We note, however, that counsel failed to abstract or discuss two adverse rulings. First, counsel moved for an appeal bond, and the court denied the motion. On appeal, however, the issue is now moot. See Logan v. State, 299 Ark. 550, 776 S.W.2d 327 (1989). Second, counsel argued that according to the sentencing grid appellant should receive alternative sanctions or a sentence to the Regional Punishment Facility. The court, however, filed a departure report; thus, the court could properly depart from the sentencing grid. See Ark. Code Ann. § 16-90-804(a)(2)(A) (Supp. 1999). Moreover, appellant's sentence was within the appropriate range for possession of cocaine, a Class C felony. See Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-401(c) (Repl. 1997); Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-401(a)(4) (Repl. 1997). Given that these issues also do not provide a meritorious ground for reversal, we grant counsel's motion to be relieved and affirm appellant's conviction.

Affirmed.

Robbins, C.J., and Neal, J., agree.