Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
Oct 07, 2004OUTCOME: New law established
Until this case, there was no provision for a "no merit" brief to be filed in a civil case, even where constitutional rights were denied. Mary Linker Flores was the mother of five children who were ... removed from her due to abuse and neglect. I was appointed to represent her in her attempt to have her children returned to her. She was not successful, did not cooperate with the Department of Human Services, and at the final hearing, when her parental rights to all of her children were terminated, she admitted to perjuring herself. By law, there is a right of appeal from the termination of parental rights. The client's case had no merit. Because of the perjury, there was no way to defend what she had done, and no reasonable argument could be made to persuade the court to allow her to maintain her parental rights. I asked the court to be relieved from the obligation of representing Ms. Flores, explaining that I believed the appeal to be without merit and frivolous. I believe it is a violation of an attorney's ethical duty to file frivolous claims. The Supreme Court denied my request, and ordered that the attorneys involved brief the issue of whether there is a right to counsel at the appeal of such a case, and what should be done if the appeal is meritless. The court decided to require attorneys in such a position to completely brief any possible issues in the style dictated by Anders v. California, whereby all legal issues are presented to the court. This is a landmark case in Arkansas.
