Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 93 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CA12-939 BRIAN HUME Opinion Delivered February 13, 2013 APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE SEBASTIAN V. COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FORT SMITH DISTRICT [NO. JV-2010-403] ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES AND MINOR HONORABLE MARK HEWETT, CHILD JUDGE APPELLEES AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED PHILLIP T. WHITEAKER, Judge Brian Hume appeals from the August 15, 2012 order of the Sebastian County Circuit Court terminating his parental rights to M.C., born January 4, 2010. His 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. 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, Hume’s counsel ordered the entire record and examined it for adverse rulings. Counsel listed the only adverse ruling in this case—the trial court’s decision to terminate appellant’s parental rights—and has adequately discussed why there is no arguable merit to an appeal. Hume was provided a copy of his counsel’s brief and motion,
Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 93 and he was informed of his right to file pro se points. He 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 Hume’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 Hume’s parental rights to M.C. 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 Hume. Affirmed; motion granted. GLOVER and VAUGHT, JJ., agree. Aubrey L. Barr, 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.