Roddrick Larnell Smith v. State of Arkansas (Majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2018 Ark. App. 205 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CR-17-354 Opinion Delivered RODDRICK LARNELL SMITH APPELLANT March 14, 2018 APPEAL FROM THE COLUMBIA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 14CR-15-201] V. HONORABLE DAVID W. TALLEY, JR., JUDGE STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED PHILLIP T. WHITEAKER, Judge Roddrick Larnell Smith1 appeals a Columbia County Circuit Court order revoking his probation and sentencing him to five years in the Arkansas Department of Correction plus five years’ suspended imposition of sentence. Smith’s attorney had previously filed a no-merit brief and a motion to withdraw as counsel pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(k) (2017) and Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). We previously ordered rebriefing due to briefing deficiencies. See Smith v. State, 2017 Ark. App. 577. Counsel has again filed a motion to withdraw and a no-merit brief, correcting those deficiencies and asserting that this appeal is wholly without merit. The motion is accompanied by an abstract and addendum of the proceedings below, alleged to include all objections and motions decided adversely to 1 We note that in other places in the record Mr. Smith’s first name is spelled “Rodrick.” appellant, and a brief in which counsel explains why there is nothing in the record that would support an appeal. The clerk of this court informed Smith of his right to file pro se points for reversal; however, he has not done so. Consequently, the attorney general has not filed a brief in response. The test for filing a no-merit brief is not whether there is any reversible error but whether an appeal would be wholly frivolous. See Wright v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 300, at 1–2; Tucker v. State, 47 Ark. App. 96, 885 S.W.2d 904 (1994). Counsel has abstracted and briefed all adverse rulings, including the sufficiency of the evidence to support the revocation and the denial of his request for probation at sentencing. We have also thoroughly reviewed the entire record and the brief presented to us. From our review, we find compliance with Rule 4-3(k) and that there is no merit to an appeal. We therefore grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the convictions. Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted. GRUBER, C.J., and HIXSON, J., agree. The Burns Law Firm, PLLC, by: Meagan Burns, for appellant. One brief only. 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.
