From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

King v. State

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II
May 22, 2013
2013 Ark. App. 333 (Ark. Ct. App. 2013)

Opinion

No. CR-12-999

05-22-2013

CHRISTOPHER DEAN KING APPELLANT v. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE

Potts Law Office, by: Gary W. Potts, for appellant. Dustin McDaniel, Att'y Gen., by: Valerie Glover Fortner, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.


APPEAL FROM THE BRADLEY

COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

[NO. CR2011-04-4]


HONORABLE TERESA FRENCH,

JUDGE


AFFIRMED; MOTION TO

WITHDRAW GRANTED


ROBERT J. GLADWIN , Chief Judge

Appellant, Christopher King, pleaded guilty to theft by receiving. He was sentenced to sixty months' imprisonment to be followed by a suspended imposition of sentence for thirty-six months. On August 23, 2012, the State filed a petition to revoke appellant's suspended sentence alleging that he had committed the new offense of residential burglary, had failed to remain gainfully employed, and had not paid restitution, costs, or fees. After the September 17, 2012 revocation hearing, appellant's suspended sentence was revoked, and he was sentenced to thirty-five years' imprisonment.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(k) (2012), appellant's counsel has filed a motion to be relieved, stating that there is no merit to the appeal. The motion is accompanied by an abstract and addendum of the proceedings below, including all objections and motions decided adversely to appellant, and a brief in which counsel explains why there is nothing in the record to support an appeal.

The clerk of this court served appellant with a copy of his counsel's brief and notified him of his right to file a pro se statement of points for reversal within thirty days. Appellant has filed a statement of points consisting entirely of matters that are either sufficiently explained as nonmeritorious by counsel or not preserved for appellate review.

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 without merit. Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw is granted, and the revocation is affirmed.

Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted.

HIXSON and BROWN, JJ., agree.

Potts Law Office, by: Gary W. Potts, for appellant.

Dustin McDaniel, Att'y Gen., by: Valerie Glover Fortner, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.


Summaries of

King v. State

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II
May 22, 2013
2013 Ark. App. 333 (Ark. Ct. App. 2013)
Case details for

King v. State

Case Details

Full title:CHRISTOPHER DEAN KING APPELLANT v. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE

Court:ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II

Date published: May 22, 2013

Citations

2013 Ark. App. 333 (Ark. Ct. App. 2013)

Citing Cases

King v. State

The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the revocation order. King v. State, 2013 Ark. App. 333. The mandate…