FROM THE SEBASTIAN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FORT SMITH DISTRICT
[NOS. 66FCR-15-222 AND 66FCR-2005-1107] HONORABLE JAMES O.
L. Dunagin, for appellant.
Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: Jacob H. Jones, Ass't
Att'y Gen., for appellee.
appeals from the circuit court's order revoking his
suspended imposition of sentence (SIS) on finding him guilty
of simultaneous possession of drugs and firearms, possession
of cocaine with intent to deliver, and possession of drug
paraphernalia. Appellant's counsel has filed a no-merit
brief and a motion to withdraw, pursuant to Anders v.
California and Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(k),
stating that there are no meritorious grounds to support an
appeal. The clerk mailed a certified copy of counsel's
motion and brief to appellant informing him of his right to
file pro se points for reversal. Appellant filed a pro se
motion to file points for reversal belatedly; the motion was
denied. We affirm appellant's revocation and grant
counsel's motion to withdraw.
circuit court's November 7, 2005 judgment and commitment
order shows that appellant pled guilty to maintaining a drug
premises for drug sales, possession of marijuana with intent
to deliver, possession of drug paraphernalia, simultaneous
possession of drugs and firearms, possession of cocaine with
intent to deliver, and felon in possession of firearms in
case number CR-2005-1107-B. He was sentenced to 84 months in
the Arkansas Department of Correction (ADC), to be followed
by 120 months' SIS. The terms and conditions of his SIS
stated that violation of any of the terms and conditions
could result in appellant being incarcerated in the ADC for a
term of no more than thirty-three years.
March 10, 2015, a criminal information was filed against
appellant in case number CR-2015-222-A, alleging possession
of drug paraphernalia on March 5, 2015. The circuit
court's September 1, 2015 sentencing order stated that
appellant pled guilty as charged and was sentenced to 60
filed a petition to revoke on February 8, 2017, alleging that
appellant committed new offenses on February 6, 2017:
possession of drug paraphernalia, possession of cocaine with
purpose to deliver, possession of hydrocodone with purpose to
deliver, and possession of Xanax with purpose to deliver. It
also alleged that appellant failed to pay his public-defender
fees, fines, costs, and other fees as ordered. Appellee filed
an amended petition on March 21, 2017, adding an allegation
that appellant committed the offense of delivery of cocaine
on February 20 and 21, 2017.
revocation hearing was held on August 24, 2017. Only Greg
Napier of the Fort Smith Police Department testified. Napier
stated that he met with the confidential informant (CI)
"prior to the deal"; the "[CI] was searched to
make sure that she didn't have any drugs, contraband or
money in her possession"; and the money provided was
prerecorded. The entire transaction was such that the CI met
appellant-alone-at the Continental Motel in Fort Smith,
Arkansas; gave him money; drove appellant to 4015 North 54th
Street where he went inside, retrieved the substance, came
out, and sold it to the CI; and then the CI took appellant
back to where she had picked him up. Napier testified that
after the CI made the transaction, they "did the
reverse[, ]" i.e., "searched her to make sure she
did not have contraband, money" and she did not. Napier
had given the CI $100, and she was given a plastic bag that
contained several pieces of what Napier identified to be
cocaine through field testing. The drugs were sent to the
Arkansas State Crime Lab, which confirmed that the substance
was cocaine with a weight of .52 grams. This buy had been the
second of two buys, the first occurring on February 16,
2017.Following Napier's testimony, both
sentencing order was entered on August 29, 2017, stating that
appellant was found guilty in a bench trial and sentenced to
336 months in the ADC. This timely appeal
compliance with Anders and Rule 4-3(k), counsel
ordered the entire record and found that after a
conscientious review of the record, there are no issues of
arguable merit for appeal. Counsel's brief adequately
covered the only action that was adverse to appellant below,
which was the revocation itself. After carefully examining
the record and the brief presented to us, we find that
counsel has complied with the requirements established by the
Arkansas Supreme Court for no-merit appeals in criminal cases
and conclude that the appeal is wholly without merit.
motion to withdraw granted.
Gruber, C.J., and ...