Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 132
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II
No. CR-14-498
Opinion Delivered FEBRUARY 25, 2015
APPEAL FROM THE
INDEPENDENCE COUNTY
TIMOTHY WAYNE COX CIRCUIT COURT
APPELLANT [NO. CR-08-140]
V. HONORABLE JOHN DAN KEMP,
JUDGE
STATE OF ARKANSAS REBRIEFING ORDERED; MOTION
APPELLEE TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL
DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
KENNETH S. HIXSON, Judge
Appellant Timothy Wayne Cox was convicted by a jury of raping a nine-year-old girl
and was sentenced to forty years in prison. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), and Rule 4-3(k) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court, appellant’s counsel has
filed a motion to withdraw on the grounds that this appeal is wholly without merit. The
motion was accompanied by an abstract, brief, and addendum purporting to list all adverse
rulings and to explain why each adverse ruling is not a meritorious ground for reversal.
Mr. Cox was provided a copy of his counsel’s brief and notified of his right to file pro se
points for reversal, but he has not filed any points. We deny counsel’s motion to withdraw
and order rebriefing because counsel has submitted an incomplete addendum and has failed
to address all of the adverse rulings.
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 132
Appellant’s counsel’s brief contains a table of contents indicating that the addendum
contains seventy-one pages. However, inexplicably and through apparent inadvertence, the
addendum actually submitted omits the first page, which is identified as the criminal
information charging appellant with rape, and the addendum stops at page forty-seven.
According to the table of contents, the missing pages at the end of the addendum consist of
critical items including the sentencing order being appealed from and the notice of appeal.
Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(8) requires that an appellant’s brief include an
addendum consisting of all documents essential for this court to confirm its jurisdiction, to
understand the case, and to decide the issues on appeal. The addendum is incomplete, and
we order appellant’s counsel on rebriefing to submit a complete addendum, to include all of
the documents identified by counsel in the table of contents.
Furthermore, although appellant’s counsel discussed most of the adverse rulings in his
brief, our independent review of the record reveals an additional adverse ruling that counsel
failed to address. This adverse ruling is contained in the abstract at page 171, where the trial
court sustained the State’s objection to testimony regarding the awards Mr. Cox earned in his
military service. Under Rule 4-3(k)(1), before this court may grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw, he must adequately explain why each adverse ruling is not a meritorious ground
for reversal in his brief, and a failure to do so requires rebriefing. Pledger v. State, 2015 Ark.
App. 14.
Pursuant to Rule 4-2(b)(3), we afford appellant’s counsel an opportunity to cure these
deficiencies. Counsel is directed to file a substituted abstract, brief, and addendum within
2
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 132
fifteen days from the date of this opinion. We encourage counsel, prior to filing a substituted
brief, to carefully review Rules 4-2 and 4-3 to ensure that no additional deficiencies exist.
After the filing of the substituted brief, counsel’s motion and brief will be forwarded by our
clerk to appellant so that, within thirty days, he again will have the opportunity to raise pro
se points in accordance with Rule 4-3(k). The State will likewise be given the opportunity
to file a responsive brief. See Johnson v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 22.
Rebriefing ordered; motion to be relieved as counsel denied without prejudice.
ABRAMSON and HOOFMAN, JJ., agree.
John C. Burnett, for appellant.
No response.
3