Cite as 2012 Ark. App. 421 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CA12-158 Opinion Delivered June 27, 2012 ASHLEY SHIERLING APPEAL FROM THE FULTON APPELLANT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [JV-2010-33-3] V. HONORABLE LEE WISDOM ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HARROD, JUDGE HUMAN SERVICES & MINOR CHILD APPELLEES AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED DAVID M. GLOVER, Judge Ashley Shierling appeals from the termination of her parental rights to her minor daughter, D.S. The order terminating her parental rights was entered November 30, 2011. 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 the appeal. 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)(2011) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, Shierling’s counsel ordered the entire record and examined it for adverse rulings. Other than the order terminating Shierling’s parental rights, there were no adverse rulings. With respect to the termination itself, her counsel explained why a challenge to the termination would not support a meritorious argument for reversal.
Cite as 2012 Ark. App. 421 Shierling was provided with a copy of her counsel’s brief and motion, and she was informed of her right to file pro se points. She filed no pro se points. The Arkansas Department of Human Services did not file a responsive brief. After carefully examining the record and the brief, we hold that her 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 Shierling’s parental rights to D.S. See In re Memorandum Opinions, 16 Ark. App. 301, 700 S.W.2d 63 (1985); Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 5-2(e) (2011). We also grant her counsel’s motion to withdraw from representation of Shierling. Affirmed; motion granted. WYNNE and BROWN, JJ., agree. Leah Lanford, Ark. Pub. Defender Comm’n, 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.