Court of Appeals

Decision Information

Decision Content

Cite as 2010 Ark. App. 44 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CACR09-311 DEANGELO DEWAYNE DILLARD, Opinion Delivered JANUARY 13, 2010 APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE CRITTENDEN V. COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, [NO. CR-2007-300] STATE OF ARKANSAS, HONORABLE H. GRAHAM APPELLEE PARTLOW, JR., JUDGE AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED KAREN R. BAKER, Judge On March 8, 2007, appellant Deangelo Dillard was charged with sale or delivery of a controlled substance in Crittenden County Circuit Court. Appellant entered a guilty plea to the reduced charge of possession of a controlled substance, a Class C felony. Appellant was placed on forty-eight months probation. On August 18, 2008, the State filed a petition to revoke appellants probation, alleging that appellant had violated the following conditions of his probation: failure to pay fines, costs, and fees as directed; failure to report to probation officer as directed; failure to pay probation fees; failure to notify sheriff and probation officer of current address and employment; committing the unlawful acts of aggravated assault, fleeing, sale or delivery of a controlled substance (cocaine); inciting a riot; failure to satisfy municipal court commitment; driving a vehicle with a suspended drivers license; and possession and use of marijuana. After a hearing on the States petition, the trial court found that appellant had violated the terms and conditions of his
Cite as 2010 Ark. App. 44 probation and sentenced him to eight years imprisonment in the Arkansas Department of Correction. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Rule 4-3(k) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, appellants counsel has filed a motion to withdraw on grounds that the appeal is without merit. The motion is accompanied by counsels brief in which counsel explains why there is nothing in the record that would arguably support an appeal. The clerk of this court provided appellant with a copy of his counsels brief and notified him of his right to file a pro se list of points on appeal within thirty days. Appellant did not file a list of pro se points on appeal. From our review of the record and the briefs presented to us, we find compliance with Rule 4-3(k) and that the appeal is wholly without merit. Accordingly, we grant counsels motion to withdraw and affirm the revocation of appellants probation. Affirmed; motion to be relieved granted. HENRY and BROWN, JJ., agree. -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.