Cite as 2012 Ark. App. 3 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II No. CACR11-83 Opinion Delivered January 4, 2012 DARREN EARL BULL APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE FAULKNER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. CR-2009-73] V. HONORABLE DAVID L. REYNOLDS, JUDGE STATE OF ARKANSAS AFFIRMED; MOTION TO APPELLEE WITHDRAW GRANTED JOHN MAUZY PITTMAN, Judge Appellant pled guilty in May 2009 to charges of possession of a firearm by certain persons, violation of the Hot Check Law, and driving with a suspended or revoked license. He was placed on probation for a period of four years; ordered to pay restitution, court costs, and fees; and ordered to submit to drug treatment. Appellant’s probation was conditioned on several requirements, including that he report to his probation officer; submit to a treatment program; refrain from illegal drug use; and not violate any state, local, or federal laws. A petition to revoke appellant’s probation was filed in July 2010, alleging that he violated the terms thereof by failing to report as directed; having positive drug screens; failing to enter and complete drug treatment; and failing to pay fines, fees, and court costs. After a hearing, the trial court found that appellant violated the conditions of his probation and sentenced him to three years’ imprisonment.
Cite as 2012 Ark. App. 3 Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(k) (2011), appellant’s counsel has filed a motion to be relieved, stating that there is no merit to the appeal. The motion is accompanied by an abstract and addendum of the proceedings below, including all objections and motions decided adversely to 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 served appellant with a copy of his counsel’s brief and notified him of his right to file a pro se statement of points for reversal within thirty days. Appellant has filed no statement. From our review of the record and the brief presented to us, we find compliance with Rule 4-3(k) and that the appeal is without merit. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted, and the revocation order is affirmed. Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted. WYNNE and MARTIN, JJ., agree. Caroline L. Winningham, for appellant. No response. 2
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.