ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION IV
No. CR-14-683
ALBERT W. LIDDELL Opinion Delivered June 17, 2015
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE CRITTENDEN
V. COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. CR-2011-1018]
STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE RALPH WILSON, JR.,
APPELLEE JUDGE
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
RITA W. GRUBER, Judge
This no-merit revocation case is before us for the second time. In Liddell v. State,
, we ordered rebriefing because counsel had not complied with the
requirements of Rules 4-3(k) and 4-2(a)(5) of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of
Appeals (2014). Counsel now has filed a no-merit brief and a motion to withdraw that
comply with the requirements of our rules and of Anders v. California,
(1967).
Albert W. Liddell has been notified of his right to file a list of pro se points for reversal, but
he has not done so.
The State alleged in its petition to revoke that Liddell had violated various conditions
of his probation for theft of property. At the conclusion of the revocation hearing, the circuit
court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Liddell had inexcusably failed to comply
with conditions requiring him to pay fines and costs and to pay probation fees; to live a law-
abiding life, not violate any laws, and not associate with persons who do; and to cooperate
Cite as
with his probation officer and report as directed. By sentencing order of May 6, 2014,
Liddell’s probation was revoked and he was sentenced to thirty-six months’ imprisonment and
thirty-six months’ suspended imposition of sentence.
Counsel’s brief adequately explains why none of the adverse rulings arguably
constitutes a meritorious ground for reversal. We therefore affirm the revocation and grant
counsel’s motion to withdraw.
Affirmed; motion granted.
HARRISON and VAUGHT, JJ., agree.
C. Brian Williams, for appellant.
No response.
2
