Smith v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

Full title: Patricia SMITH, Appellant v. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES and…

Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas, Division I

Date published: Apr 13, 2011

2011 Ark. App. 272 (Ark. Ct. App. 2011)

Opinion

CA 10-1305

Opinion Delivered April 13, 2011

Appeal from the Crittenden County Circuit Court, [No. JV-2009-196], Honorable Ralph Wilson, Jr., Judge, Rebriefing Ordered; Motion To Withdraw Denied.

ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Judge.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Crittenden County Circuit Court that terminated appellant Patricia Smith's parental rights in her minor son. Appellant's counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and a no-merit brief pursuant to Linker-Flores v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004), and Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 6-9(i), stating that there are no issues of arguable merit for appeal. Counsel lists the termination decision as the circuit court's only adverse ruling and explains why that ruling is not a meritorious ground for reversal. However, our review of the record reveals that counsel failed to abstract the hearing on the petition to terminate appellant's parental rights as required by Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 6-9(e)(2)(C) and 6-9(i)(1)(B).

In Sartin v. State, 2010 Ark. 16, ___ S.W.3d ___, (per curiam)our supreme court held that the failure to list and discuss all adverse rulings in a no-merit termination-of-parental-rights case does not automatically require rebriefing if the ruling would clearly not present a meritorious ground for reversal. We decline, however, to overlook the complete omission of the required abstract in this case. Therefore, we order rebriefing and direct counsel to properly abstract the circuit court's July 29, 2010 hearing on the petition to terminate appellant's parental rights.

Rebriefing ordered; motion to withdraw denied.

WYNNE and GLOVER, JJ., agree.