F. Wilson v. State

Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 392

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION III
No. CR-16-852

Opinion Delivered June 21, 2017

FREDRICK LEON WILSON APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
APPELLANT FOURTH DIVISION
V. [NO. 60CR-14-3266]

STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE HERBERT WRIGHT,
JUDGE
APPELLEE
REMANDED FOR
SUPPLEMENTATION OF THE
RECORD AND REBRIEFING
ORDERED; MOTION TO
WITHDRAW DENIED

DAVID M. GLOVER, Judge

Fredrick Leon Wilson was tried by a jury and found guilty of the offense of sexual

assault in the second degree. He was sentenced to 144 months in the Arkansas Department

of Correction, and a notice of appeal was timely filed. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386

U.S. 738 (1967), and Rule 4-3(k) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court

of Appeals, Wilson’s counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, accompanied by an abstract,

addendum, and brief, purporting to set forth all adverse rulings in this case and contending

that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal. The clerk of our court mailed a certified

copy of counsel’s motion and brief to Wilson in accordance with Supreme Court Rule 4-

3(k)(2), informing him of his right to file pro se points for reversal. Wilson filed no points.

We deny the motion to withdraw and remand the case for supplementation of the record
Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 392

and rebriefing because the requirements of Anders, supra, and Rule 4-3(k) have not been

satisfied.

An attorney attempting to withdraw from a criminal appeal must list every adverse

ruling and explain how each ruling could provide no meritorious ground for reversal.

Weaver v. State, 2013 Ark. App. 310. Even a single omission from a no-merit brief

necessarily requires rebriefing. Id.

Here, counsel’s presentation of the adverse rulings he addressed was exemplary.

However, the record reveals several unabstracted pretrial motions that apparently were

addressed in an omnibus hearing, but the omnibus hearing was not included in the record

and, consequently, not abstracted or addressed in the brief. We have no way of knowing if

the motions were decided in Wilson’s favor or adversely to him. Without the full

presentation and discussion of the rulings on these motions, we are unable to determine if

an appeal in this case would be wholly without merit.

Counsel is directed to supplement the record within fifteen days from the date of this

opinion, and file a substituted abstract, brief, and addendum within fifteen days thereafter.

In addition, we always encourage counsel to carefully review the rules and Anders, supra, to

ensure that no other deficiencies exist.

Remanded for supplementation of the record and rebriefing ordered; motion to

withdraw denied.

ABRAMSON and GLADWIN, JJ., agree.

Robert M. “Robby” Golder, for appellant.

No response.

2