Elkington v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION I
No. CA09-64
Opinion Delivered
June 3, 2009
JENNIFER ELKINGTON
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE POPE COUNTY
CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. JV-07-231]
V.
HONORABLE KEN D. COKER, JR.,
JUDGE
ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF
HUMAN SERVICES
APPELLEE
AFFIRMED; MOTION TO
WITHDRAW GRANTED
JOHN MAUZY PITTMAN, Judge
This is an appeal from an order terminating appellant’s parental rights to a minor child,
S.P., born November 13, 2001. Appellant’s attorney has filed a motion to withdraw as
counsel pursuant to Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 359 Ark. 131, 194
S.W.3d 739 (2004), and Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 6-9(i), asserting that there are no
issues of arguable merit to support the appeal. Counsel’s motion is accompanied by an
abstract and brief stating that, other than the final decision, no adverse rulings were made at
the termination hearing and explaining why there is no meritorious ground for reversal,
including a discussion of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the termination order.
The clerk of this court sent copies of counsel’s brief and the motion to appellant,
informing her that she had the right to file pro se points for reversal. See Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 69(i)(3). Appellant has submitted a pro se response to counsel’s brief that raises no legal issues
but that instead contains an admission of past errors and a plea for another chance to correct
them.
In essence, the record shows that removal was based on neglect that was largely
attributable to appellant’s use of drugs and that, although appropriate services were offered,
appellant failed to avail herself of them and complete her case plan. Based on our examination
of the record and the briefs, we find that counsel has complied with the requirements
established by the Arkansas Supreme Court for no-merit motions in termination cases, and
we hold that the appeal is wholly without merit. Consequently, we grant counsel’s motion
to withdraw and affirm the order terminating appellant’s parental rights.
Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted.
M ARSHALL and H ENRY, JJ., agree.
-2-
CA09-64
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
