Sloan v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.

2013 Ark. App. 511

• Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas
• Decided: September 18, 2013
• Docket: CV-13-334
• Status: Published

Opinion

Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 511

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II No.CV-13-334

BRITTANY SLOAN Opinion Delivered September 18, 2013

APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE DALLAS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT V. [NO. JV-12-1-5]

HONORABLE LARRY W. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CHANDLER, JUDGE HUMAN SERVICES AND MINOR CHILD AFFIRMED; MOTION TO BE APPELLEES RELIEVED AS COUNSEL GRANTED

PHILLIP T. WHITEAKER, Judge

This is a no-merit appeal from an order terminating the parental rights of appellant

Brittany Sloan to her child,T.H. Sloan’s attorney has filed a motion to be relieved as counsel

and a no-merit brief 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) (2012), asserting

that there are no issues of arguable merit to support the appeal. The brief includes a

discussion of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the termination order, which was the

only adverse ruling by the circuit court.

The clerk of this court sent copies of the brief and motion to be relieved to Sloan,

advising her that she had the right to file pro se points for reversal. Sloan submitted

arguments on her own behalf, asserting that she deserves another chance to prove that she

can take care of T.H., that she has a steady job, and that she feels that she is capable of caring Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 511

for her daughter. Sloan has attached letters from her current boyfriend’s mother, who states

that Sloan is a good mother and wants to be given a chance to correct her mistakes; from her

boyfriend, who asserts that he wants an opportunity to act as a father for T.H.; and from

other friends and family members who all say that Sloan should get T.H. back. We conclude,

however, that Sloan’s pro se points have provided no ground for reversal, and that Sloan’s

counsel adequately addressed the sufficiency of the evidence in her no-merit brief.

After careful review of the record in accordance with Rule 6-9(i) of the Rules of the

Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, we hold that an appeal of the termination

of Sloan’s parental rights lacks merit and that the termination of her parental rights should be

affirmed. We therefore grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

Affirmed; motion to be relieved as counsel granted.

GLADWIN , C.J., and GLOVER , J., agree.

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

No response.