Simpson v. State

2016 Ark. App. 336
CourtCourt of Appeals of Arkansas
DecidedJune 22, 2016
DocketCR-15-649
StatusPublished

This text of 2016 Ark. App. 336 (Simpson 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
Simpson v. State, 2016 Ark. App. 336 (Ark. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

i

Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 336

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CR-15-649

Opinion Delivered June 22, 2016 JAMAAL DULANE SIMPSON APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE BENTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. CR-2 012-7 04-1]

HONORABLE ROBIN F. GREEN, JUDGE

STATE OF ARKANSAS AFFIRMED; MOTION TO APPELLEE WITHDRAW GRANTED

M. MICHAEL KINARD, Judge

The appellant, Jamaal Dulane Simpson, was convicted of delivery of a controlled

substance (cocaine) and possession of drug paraphemalia and was sentenced as a habitual

offender to consecutive prison terms totaling sixty-five years. He previously appealed those

convictions to this court. 'We found sufhcient merit in one of appellant's points for appeal

to warrant a limited remand co the trial court for the purpose of holding a hearing to

determine whether appellant had been competent at the time of his trial. See Simpson u.

State,2015 Ark. App. 103, 455 S.W.3d 856. Thar hearing was held, after which the trial

court entered an order finding that appellant had been fit to proceed to trial. Appellant has

again appealed.

Pursuant to Anders u. Callfornia, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Arkansas Supreme Court

Rule 4-3(k), appellant's attorney has filed a motion to be relieved as counsel, stating that .t Y

there is no merit to the appeal. The motion is accompanied by an abstract and addendum

of the proceedings below and a brief in which counsel asserts that there is nothing in the

record that would 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 thirry days. Appellant has filed no such statement.

From our review ofthe record and the briefpresented to us, we find compliance with

Rule 4-3(k) and that an appeal would be wholly without merit. Accordingly, counsel's

motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted. 'WHITEAKER and HlxsoN, JJ., agree. Robert M. "Robby" Golden, for appellant. No response.

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Simpson v. State
2015 Ark. App. 103 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2016 Ark. App. 336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simpson-v-state-arkctapp-2016.