Goodman v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 45

Appellant Goodman’s probation for endangering the welfare of a minor was revoked after violation findings; she received a two-year term in a Community Correction Center.
Counsel moved to withdraw, asserting the appeal is wholly without merit; Goodman did not file pro se points for reversal.
The court advised counsel that a no-merit brief must abstract and discuss all adverse rulings and argue why they are not grounds for reversal.
Court found counsel failed to meet Anders requirements and failed to address Goodman’s sentencing request for house arrest or similar relief.
The court denied the withdrawal, ordered rebriefing, and gave Goodman 15 days to file a substituted abstract, brief, and addendum.
The decision cites Anders v. California and Arkansas Supreme Court rules guiding no-merit briefs and withdrawal procedures.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel’s withdrawal is proper under no-merit brief standards	Goodman	Goodman’s counsel failed to comply with Anders and Rule 4-3(k) standards	Withdrawal denied; rebriefing ordered.

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (no-merit brief requirements; within-procedural review)
Eads v. State, 74 Ark. App. 363, 47 S.W.3d 918 (2001) (counsel withdrawal standards in Arkansas)
Campbell v. State, 74 Ark. App. 277, 47 S.W.3d 915 (2001) (discusses Anders-related obligations)
Sartin v. State, 2010 Ark. 16, 362 S.W.3d 877 (2010) (analysis of no-merit briefing requirements)