Smith v. State ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                   Cite as 
    2017 Ark. App. 577
    ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
    DIVISION I
    No. CR-17-354
    Opinion Delivered   November 1, 2017
    RODDRICK LARNELL SMITH                            APPEAL FROM THE COLUMBIA
    APPELLANT                      COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
    [NO. 14CR-15-201]
    V.                                                HONORABLE DAVID W. TALLEY,
    JR., JUDGE
    STATE OF ARKANSAS                                 REBRIEFING ORDERED; MOTION
    APPELLEE        TO WITHDRAW DENIED
    WITHOUT PREJUDICE
    PHILLIP T. WHITEAKER, Judge
    Roddrick Larnell Smith1 appeals a Columbia County Circuit Court order revoking his
    probation and sentencing him to five years in the Arkansas Department of Correction plus five
    years’ suspended imposition of sentence. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967),
    and Rule 4-3(k) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court, Smith’s counsel has filed a
    motion to be relieved as his attorney, alleging that this appeal is without merit. Counsel has
    also filed a brief in which he contends that all adverse rulings have been abstracted and
    discussed. In his brief, counsel asserted that the only adverse rulings by the trial court were
    related to its decision that revocation was appropriate. We disagree. Our review of the record
    reveals that there was an additional adverse ruling that was neither abstracted nor discussed by
    1
    We note that in other places in the record Mr. Smith’s first name is spelled
    “Rodrick.”
    Cite as 
    2017 Ark. App. 577
    counsel, and we must therefore deny counsel’s motion to withdraw and order rebriefing
    because of counsel’s noncompliance with Rule 4-3(k).
    A brief summary of the facts and procedural history follows. Smith pled guilty to
    furnishing prohibited articles in March 2016 and was sentenced to ten years’ probation. The
    conditions of his probation included the following: not to commit any criminal offenses
    punishable by imprisonment; not to purchase, own, control, or possess any firearm, or be in
    the company of any person possessing same; and to pay his court costs at the rate of $50 per
    month with all costs to be paid within six months. The State later filed a petition to revoke
    Smith’s probation, alleging that Smith had violated the terms and conditions of his probation
    by (1) committing the criminal offense of possession of a firearm by certain persons; (2)
    possessing a firearm; and (3) failing to pay his court costs as ordered.
    The court conducted a revocation hearing in January 2017. At the hearing, defense
    counsel informed the court that Smith was prepared to plead “true” to his failure to pay costs
    but reserved his right to remain silent on the alleged firearm violations. The court then
    received evidence that an officer with the Arkansas State Police initiated a traffic stop of a
    vehicle driven by Smith after having observed him drive on the wrong side of the road.
    Smith initially gave the officer a false name, and he was placed under arrest for obstruction of
    justice. As Smith was exiting the vehicle, the officer spotted a .22 revolver tucked between
    the driver’s seat and the center console by Smith’s right knee. The court also received
    evidence that Smith still owed $50 of his costs and that in November 2016—more than six
    months after he had been ordered to pay costs—he owed $450.
    2
    Cite as 
    2017 Ark. App. 577
    After considering the evidence presented, the court found Smith guilty of violating the
    terms and conditions of his probation by possessing a firearm and by failing to pay his fees and
    costs in full within six months. The State recommended a sentence of five years’ incarceration
    in the Arkansas Department of Correction with five years’ suspended imposition of sentence.
    Smith requested probation. The Court rejected Smith’s request and sentenced Smith per the
    recommendation of the State.
    Smith appealed his revocation, and counsel has filed a no-merit brief. In a criminal no-
    merit appeal, counsel is required to abstract each adverse ruling by the circuit court and to
    discuss why each particular ruling would not present a meritorious basis for reversal. Arkansas
    Supreme Court Rule 4-3(k)(1); 
    Anders, supra
    . We must order rebriefing if counsel fails to do
    so. Sartin v. State, 
    2010 Ark. 16
    , 
    362 S.W.3d 877
    . In the present case, trial counsel asked that
    the court sentence Smith to probation rather than incarceration. The trial court denied the
    request and sentenced Smith to five years in the Arkansas Department of Correction plus five
    years’ suspended imposition of sentence.        Counsel neither abstracted the request nor
    articulated why this adverse ruling was not meritorious.
    Because the no-merit brief in this case is deficient, we order counsel to file a
    substituted abstract, brief, and addendum within fifteen days from the date of this opinion.
    Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(3). The deficiency noted above should not be taken as an exhaustive
    list, and we encourage counsel to review the requirements contained in Rule 4-3(k)(1) prior
    to filing a substituted brief. We express no opinion as to whether the substituted appeal
    should address the merits or should be made pursuant to Rule 4-3(k)(1). If a no-merit brief
    3
    Cite as 
    2017 Ark. App. 577
    is filed, counsel’s motion and brief will be forwarded by the clerk to Smith so that, within
    thirty days, he will again have the opportunity to raise any points he chooses in accordance
    with Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(k)(2). In either instance, the State shall be afforded
    the opportunity to file a brief in response.
    Rebriefing ordered; motion to withdraw denied without prejudice.
    ABRAMSON and GLADWIN, JJ., agree.
    The Burns Law Firm, PLLC, by: Meagan Burns, for appellant.
    One brief only.
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: CR-17-354

Judges: Phillip T. Whiteaker

Filed Date: 11/1/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/1/2017