Bates-Zingleman v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs. (Majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 433 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I CV-11-1146 No. Opinion Delivered June RACHAEL BATES-ZINGELMAN APPELLANT V. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES and MINOR CHILDREN APPELLEES 26, 2013 APPEAL FROM THE RANDOLPH COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [No. JV-10-24] HONORABLE KEVIN KING, JUDGE AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED LARRY D. VAUGHT, Judge Rachael Bates-Zingelman appeals from the September 6, 2011 order of the Randolph County Circuit Court terminating her parental rights to J.B.1 (born June 15, 1999); C.B. (born October 10, 2001); J.B.2 (born September 28, 2003); D.B. (born March 10, 2006); and C.Z. (born July 21, 2009). Her attorney has filed a no-merit brief and a motion to withdraw as counsel contending that there are no meritorious issues that could arguably support an appeal.1 We agree. In compliance with Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004), and Rule 6-9(i) (2012) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, Bates-Zingelman s counsel ordered the entire record and examined it for adverse rulings. Counsel has listed the only adverse ruling in this case the trial court s decision to terminate her parental rights and has adequately discussed why there is no arguable merit 1 This is Bates-Zingelman s counsel s second attempt to file a no-merit appeal. On June 27, 2012, in Bates-Zingelman v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 2012 Ark. App. 426, we ordered rebriefing due to addendum deficiencies. Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 433 to an appeal of that decision. Bates-Zingelman was provided a copy of her counsel s brief and motion, and she was informed of her right to file pro se points. She did not do so. Neither the Arkansas Department of Human Services nor the attorney ad litem filed a responsive brief. After carefully examining the record and the no-merit brief, we hold that BatesZingelman s counsel has complied with the requirements for no-merit parental-termination appeals and that the appeal is wholly without merit. Accordingly, by memorandum opinion, we affirm the termination of Bates-Zingelman s parental rights to J.B.1, C.B., J.B.2, D.B., and C.Z. In re Memorandum Opinions, 16 Ark. App. 301, 700 S.W.2d 63 (1985); Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 5-2(e) (2012). We also grant counsel s motion to withdraw from representation of Bates-Zingelman. Affirmed; motion granted. GLADWIN, C.J., and GLOVER, J., agree. Terry Goodwin Jones, for appellant. No response. -2-
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.
