ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
No. CR 07731
STATE OF ARKANSAS
January 31, 2008
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT
OF POPE COUNTY, CR 2003180,
HON. DENNIS SUTTERFIELD,
JUDGE; MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
A jury convicted appellant Carl Tice of three counts of raping his daughter. Appellant
appealed the judgment and the Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed. Tice v. State, CACR 031314
(Ark. App. Dec. 15, 2004). Appellant timely filed in the trial court a pro se petition for
postconviction relief under Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1. The trial court appointed counsel to represent
appellant in the Rule 37.1 proceeding, and, following a hearing, the petition was denied. On appeal,
this court reversed and remanded for findings as to instructions to counsel, compliance with those
instructions, and an order in compliance with Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.3(c). Tice v. State, CR 06114
(Ark. Nov. 16, 2006) (per curiam). On remand, counsel filed an amended petition and the petition,
as amended, was again denied.
Counsel appointed to represent appellant in his Rule 37.1 proceeding, Mr. J. Michael Helms,
has now filed in this court a brief asserting that appellant’s appealof the order denying postconviction
relief has no merit, and a motion requesting that he be granted permission to withdraw as counsel.
While a “nomerit” brief is typically filed in a direct appeal from a judgment, this court has allowed
the filing of nomerit briefs in postconviction appeals. SeeHewitt v. State, 362 Ark. 369, 208 S.W.3d
185 (2005) (per curiam);Brady v. State, 346 Ark. 298, 57 S.W.3d 691 (2001) (per curiam). Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) and Arkansas SupremeCourt Rule 43(j)(1) set requirements for
the withdrawal of counsel for a defendant in a criminal case after a notice of appeal has been filed on
the basis that an appeal is without merit.
Under Rule 43, an attorney who wishes to withdraw from an app