Sims v. State
Sims v. State
Opinion
Cite as
2015 Ark. App. 11ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CR-14-466
MARCUS MARTEZ SIMS Opinion Delivered JANUARY 14, 2015 APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE CRITTENDEN V. COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. CR-2010-1218]
STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE RALPH WILSON, JR., APPELLEE JUDGE
REBRIEFING ORDERED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW DENIED
DAVID M. GLOVER, Judge
In October 2010, appellant Marcus Sims entered a negotiated plea of guilty to one
count of sale or delivery of a controlled substance (cocaine). He was sentenced to five years’
incarceration, to be followed by a ten-year suspended imposition of sentence. In April 2013,
the State filed a petition to revoke Sims’s suspended sentence and filed an amended petition
later that month. The State filed a second amended petition for revocation in February 2014.
After a revocation hearing on February 14, 2014, the trial court revoked Sims’s suspended
sentence on the bases that he had paid nothing toward his fine and costs and that he sold crack
cocaine to a confidential informant on two separate occasions. Sims was sentenced to twelve
years’ incarceration, to be followed by an eight-year suspended imposition of sentence.
Pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738(1967), and Rule 4-3(k) of the Arkansas
Rules of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, appellant’s counsel has filed a motion to Cite as
2015 Ark. App. 11withdraw on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. Counsel’s motion was
accompanied by a brief referring to everything in the record that might arguably support an
appeal, including a list of all rulings adverse to appellant made by the trial court on all
objections, motions and requests made by either party with an explanation as to why each
adverse ruling is not a meritorious ground for reversal. The clerk of this court furnished
appellant with a copy of his counsel’s brief and notified him of his right to file pro se points.
Sims has filed no points. For the reasons discussed below, we deny counsel’s motion to
withdraw and order rebriefing.
We must order rebriefing because the two amended petitions for revocation are not
contained in the addendum. Additionally, the conditions of Sims’s probation are not
contained in the addendum. Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(8)(A) (2014) requires that
the addendum contain all relevant pleadings, orders, documents, and exhibits in the record
that are essential to an understanding of the case. In Snyder v. State,
2010 Ark. App. 817, this
court ordered rebriefing because the revocation petitions were not in the addendum,
explaining that the petitions were essential to the understanding of the case because an order
could not be reviewed for error when the addendum did not contain the documents on
which the order was based. Here, the second amended petition contained one of the bases
on which the trial court revoked Sims’s suspended sentence—two sales of crack cocaine to
the confidential informant. Furthermore, in Green v. State,
2009 Ark. App. 519,
334 S.W.3d 418, this court ordered rebriefing when the terms and conditions of probation were not
included in the addendum, explaining that the terms and conditions were essential to our
2 Cite as
2015 Ark. App. 11appellate review in determining whether those conditions had been violated. In the present
case, the terms and conditions of Sims’s suspended sentence, while in the record, are not
contained in the addendum.
Rebriefing ordered; motion to withdraw denied.
GRUBER and HIXSON, JJ., agree.
S. Butler Bernard, Sr., for appellant.
No response.
3
Reference
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published