Charles Morgan v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children

2020 Ark. App. 409
CourtCourt of Appeals of Arkansas
DecidedSeptember 16, 2020
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2020 Ark. App. 409 (Charles Morgan v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children) 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
Charles Morgan v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children, 2020 Ark. App. 409 (Ark. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Reason: I attest to the Cite as 2020 Ark. App. 409 accuracy and integrity of this document ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS Date: 2021-07-09 09:06:39 Foxit PhantomPDF Version: DIVISION II 9.7.5 No. CV-19-704

CHARLES MORGAN Opinion Delivered: September 16, 2020 APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE POLK V. COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 57JV-17-30] ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES AND MINOR CHILDREN HONORABLE JERRY RYAN, APPELLEES JUDGE SUPPLEMENTAL ADDENDUM ORDERED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW DENIED

PHILLIP T. WHITEAKER, Judge

Appellant, Charles Morgan, appeals a Polk County Circuit Court order terminating

his parental rights to two children, C.M. and A.M. Morgan’s counsel initially filed a no-

merit brief and motion to withdraw as counsel pursuant to Linker-Flores v. Arkansas

Department of Human Services, 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004), and Arkansas Supreme

Court Rule 6-9(i) (2019). Due to various deficiencies in the record and brief, we denied

counsel’s motion to withdraw and ordered him to supplement the record and cure the

briefing deficiencies. Morgan v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2020 Ark. App. 128. As ordered,

Morgan’s counsel filed the supplemental record along with a substituted no-merit brief and

motion to be relieved as counsel. Counsel, however, has failed to cure all the deficiencies

identified in our previous opinion. In our previous opinion in this case, we specifically noted that the addendum to the

no-merit brief failed to include the notice of appeal. The substituted brief filed by counsel

again fails to include the notice of appeal.1 Rule 6-9 provides in relevant part as follows:

Following the signature and certificate of service, the appellant's petition shall contain an addendum which shall include true and legible photocopies of the order, judgment, decree, ruling, or letter opinion from which the appeal is taken, a copy of the notice of appeal, and any other relevant pleadings, documents, or exhibits essential to an understanding of the case[.]

Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 6-9(e)(2)(E) (emphasis added). Further, Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-

2(a)(8)(A)(i) provides that all notices of appeal must be included in the addendum along

with “any other pleading or document in the record that is essential for the appellate court

to affirm its jurisdiction, to understand the case, and to decide the issues on appeal.”

In the instant case, Morgan’s notice of appeal is included in the record but is not

included in the addendum. Further, the last page of the June 21, 2018 permanency-planning

order is missing. Because the rules above require that the addendum include the notice of

appeal and all documents essential for this court to understand the case, counsel must

supplement the addendum with the notice of appeal and the missing page of permanency

planning order.

Rule 4-2 provides that if this court determines that deficiencies or omissions in the

abstract or addendum need to be corrected but complete rebriefing is not needed, then the

court will order appellant to file a supplemental abstract or addendum within seven calendar

1 We note that the table of contents indicates that the notice of appeal should be found on addendum pages 65–67. Our addendum ends at page 63. It appears that the missing pages may have simply been omitted inadvertently when the brief was filed.

2 days to provide the additional materials from the record to the members of the appellate

court. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(4). Accordingly, we order counsel to file the supplemental

addendum containing the missing pages within seven calendar days of the date of this

opinion. We encourage counsel to carefully and thoroughly review our rules to ensure that

no additional deficiencies are present. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(4).

Supplemental addendum ordered; motion to withdraw denied.

VIRDEN and GLADWIN, JJ., agree.

Thomas Wilson, for appellant.

One brief only.

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

Related

Charles Morgan v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children
2021 Ark. App. 101 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2021)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 Ark. App. 409, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charles-morgan-v-arkansas-department-of-human-services-and-minor-children-arkctapp-2020.