Page:Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 359 Ark. 131 (2004).pdf/2

Rh

  or her right to file points for reversal within thirty days; if the appellate court determines, after a full examination of the record, that the appeal is frivolous, the court may grant counsel's motion and dismiss the appeal; if, however, the court finds any of the legal points arguable on their merits, new counsel will be appointed to argue the appeal.  Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court Circuit CourtPulaski Circuit Court [sic]; Rita Gruber, Judge, affirmed as to Anastacio Flores, no-merit briefing ordered as to Mary Linker-Flores.

Cuffman and Phillips, by: James H. Phillips, for appellant Anastacio Flores.

Anne Orsi Smith, P.A., by: Anne Orsi Smith, for appellant Mary Linker-Flores.

Gray Allen Turner, DHS Office of Chief Counsel, for appellee.

Merry Alice Hesselbein, Attorney ad Litem, for appellees Adrianna Flores and Aranthza Flores, minor children.

 C I, Justice. This case arises out of an order entered by the trial court on March 3, 2003, that terminated all parental rights of Appellants Anastacio Flores and Mary Linker-Flores. Mr. Flores appeals, arguing the evidence against him was insufficient to support a termination of parental rights. Although Mrs. Flores timely filed notices of appeal, her appointed counsel filed a motion in this court to be relieved as counsel on the grounds that she could find no meritorious issues for appeal. Because Mrs. Flores is entitled to representation on appeal under Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-316(h)(1) (Supp. 2003), we denied counsel's motion to be relieved and ordered the parties to brief the issue of whether counsel representing a parent in a termination proceeding should be required to file a no-merit brief comparable to that required under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), where there appears to be no meritorious grounds for appeal. Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Services, 356 Ark. 369, 149 S.W.3d 884, 2004 WL 396342 (March 4, 2004) (per curiam). This is an issue of first impression in Arkansas. Thus, our jurisdiction is proper pursuant to Ark. S.Ct. R. 1-2(b)(1).