Smith v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs. (Majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2011 Ark. App. 488 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CA10-1305 OPINION DELIVERED A UGUST 31, 2011 PATRICIA SMITH APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE CRITTENDEN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, [NO. JV-2009-196] V. HONORABLE RALPH WILSON, JUDGE ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES and J.W., MINOR APPELLEES AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Judge The Crittenden County Circuit Court terminated appellant Patricia Smith s parental rights in her minor son, J.W., on September 22, 2010. This is the second attempt by appellant s counsel to file a motion to withdraw and a no-merit brief pursuant to Linker-Flores v. Ark. Dep t of Human Servs., 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004), and Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 6-9(i) (2010), stating that there are no issues of arguable merit for appeal. On April 13, 2011, we denied counsel s motion to withdraw and ordered rebriefing because counsel failed to abstract the hearing on the petition to terminate appellant s parental rights as required by Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 6-9(e)(2)(C), (i)(1)(B) (2010). Counsel has remedied the problem, and her current motion is accompanied by an abstract, addendum, and brief discussing the sufficiency of the evidence and listing the termination decision as the circuit court s only adverse ruling and explaining why that ruling Cite as 2011 Ark. App. 488 is not a meritorious ground for reversal. The clerk of this court sent copies of counsel s motion and brief to appellant at the address counsel provided in the certificate of service in the motion to be relieved, informing her that she had the right to file pro se points for reversal. The packet was returned to the clerk unclaimed after two notices, and appellant has not filed any pro se points. Neither the Arkansas Department of Human Services nor the ad litem attorney has chosen to file a brief; however, both have filed letters pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 6-9(i)(2) (2010) stating that they concur that the appeal has no merit. After carefully examining the record and the brief presented to us, we conclude that counsel has complied with the requirements established by the Arkansas Supreme Court for no-merit appeals in termination cases and that the appeal is wholly without merit. Accordingly, we affirm by memorandum opinion the order terminating appellant s parental rights in J.W. See In re Memorandum Opinions, 16 Ark. App. 301, 700 S.W.2d 63 (1985); Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 5-2(e) (2010). Counsel s motion to withdraw is granted. Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted. P ITTMAN and B ROWN, JJ., agree. -2- CA10-1305
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.
