Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 412 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CV-13-209 KIMBERLY PATTON AND GARY Opinion Delivered June 19, 2013 SHELLEY APPELLANTS APPEAL FROM THE SEBASTIAN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FORT V. SMITH DISTRICT [NO. JV-11-138] ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HONORABLE MARK HEWETT, HUMAN SERVICES AND MINOR JUDGE CHILDREN AFFIRMED; MOTIONS TO BE APPELLEES RELIEVED GRANTED PHILLIP T. WHITEAKER, Judge Kimberly Patton and Gary Shelley have brought separate no-merit appeals from an order terminating their parental rights to their children, A.S., T.S.1, and T.S.2. Patton’s and Shelley’s attorneys have filed motions to be relieved as counsel and no-merit briefs pursuant to Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004), and Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 6-9(i) (2012), asserting that there are no issues of arguable merit to support the appeal. Both briefs include discussions of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the termination order; in addition, they address all matters in the record that might arguably support an appeal, including all adverse rulings, and contain a statement as to why counsel considers each point raised as incapable of supporting a meritorious appeal. The clerk of this court sent copies of the briefs and motions to be relieved to Patton and
Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 412 Shelley, advising them that they had the right to file pro se points for reversal. Neither appellant responded. After careful review of the record in accordance with Rule 6-9(i) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, we hold that an appeal of the termination of appellants’ parental rights lacks merit and that the termination of their parental rights should be affirmed. We therefore grant counsels’ motions to be relieved. Affirmed; counsels’ motions to be relieved granted. VAUGHT and HIXSON, JJ., agree. Janet Lawrence, for appellant Kimberly Patton. Deborah R. Sallings, Arkansas Public Defender Commission, for appellant Gary Shelley. 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.