Abdul-Khaliq v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.

2013 Ark. App. 717
CourtCourt of Appeals of Arkansas
DecidedDecember 4, 2013
DocketCV-13-658
StatusPublished

This text of 2013 Ark. App. 717 (Abdul-Khaliq v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Abdul-Khaliq v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 2013 Ark. App. 717 (Ark. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 717

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II No. CV-13-658

BILAL ABDUL-KHALIQ Opinion Delivered December 4, 2013

APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE SEBASTIAN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, V. FORT SMITH DISTRICT [NO. JV-2004-356] ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES and HONORABLE MARK HEWETT, MINOR CHILD JUDGE

APPELLEES AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED

RHONDA K. WOOD, Judge

This is a no-merit appeal from an order terminating Bilal Abdul-Khaliq’s

parental rights to his child, MAK. Abdul-Khaliq’s appellate counsel has filed a brief

and motion to withdraw under Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human

Services, 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004), and Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 6-9(i) (2013).

Abdul-Khaliq was given an opportunity to file pro se points but has declined to do

so. We affirm and grant counsel’s motion because there is no meritorious basis for

an appeal.

MAK came into the Department of Human Services’s custody in January

2011. She had been living with her mother, who abandoned her after fleeing from

the police. Abdul-Khaliq, MAK’s father, only appeared at the probable-cause and

adjudication hearings. After that, he never went to court or contacted DHS. The Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 717

juvenile court terminated his parental rights in April 2013 on the grounds of

abandonment.

After examining the record we agree that an appeal would be meritless.

Counsel has complied with our requirements for no-merit termination cases: the

only adverse ruling was the termination order itself, and counsel has adequately

explained why there is no arguable basis to appeal that decision. We therefore

affirm by memorandum opinion, In re Memorandum Opinions, 16 Ark. App. 301,

700 S.W.2d 63 (1985), and grant the motion to withdraw.

Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted.

GLOVER and HIXSON, JJ., agree.

Deborah R. Sallings, Arkansas Public Defender Commission, for appellant.

No response.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
194 S.W.3d 739 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2004)
In Re Memorandum Opinions
700 S.W.2d 63 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2013 Ark. App. 717, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abdul-khaliq-v-ark-dept-of-human-servs-arkctapp-2013.