Houghton v. State

2014 Ark. App. 32
CourtCourt of Appeals of Arkansas
DecidedJanuary 15, 2014
DocketCR-13-284
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2014 Ark. App. 32 (Houghton v. State) 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
Houghton v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 32 (Ark. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 32

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CR-13-284

SUSAN LYNN HOUGHTON Opinion Delivered January 15, 2014 APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE JOHNSON V. COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. CR-2011-141]

STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE BILL PEARSON, APPELLEE JUDGE

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED

RITA W. GRUBER, Judge

A jury found Susan Lynn Houghton guilty of possession of drug paraphernalia with

intent to manufacture methamphetamine and possession of drug paraphernalia, for which she

was sentenced to a total 144 months’ imprisonment in the Arkansas Department of

Correction. Pursuant to Arkansas Rule 4-3(k)(1) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme

Court and Court of Appeals and Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), her attorney has

filed a motion to withdraw on the ground that there are no non-frivolous issues that would

support an appeal in this case. Counsel’s motion is accompanied by an abstract and addendum

of the proceedings below, including all objections and motions decided adversely to

Houghton, and a no-merit brief in which counsel explains why nothing in the record would

arguably support an appeal. Houghton was notified of her right to file pro se points but has

not done so.

From our review of the record and the brief presented to us, we find compliance with Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 32

Rule 4-3(k)(1) and Anders v. California, supra, and we hold that there is no merit to this

appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted and the conviction is affirmed.

Affirmed; motion granted.

HARRISON and WOOD, JJ., agree.

Witt Law Firm, P.C., by: Ernest Wayne Witt, for appellant.

No response.

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

Related

Houghton v. State
2015 Ark. 252 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2014 Ark. App. 32, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/houghton-v-state-arkctapp-2014.