NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

KAREN R. BAKER, JUDGE

DIVISION III

QUINTON LEE HANDY

APPELLANT

V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

APPELLEE

CACR00-1445

July 3, 2002

APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

[NO. CR 1999-390]

HONORABLE JAMES LEON JOHNSON, CIRCUIT JUDGE

AFFIRMED

The appellant in this case, Quinton Handy, was charged with three offenses: possession of a controlled substance (cocaine), a violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-401 (1997), a Class C felony; resisting arrest, a violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-54-103 (1997), a Class A misdemeanor; and battery in the third degree, a violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-13-203 (1997), a Class A misdemeanor. After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of all three offenses. Following the introduction of evidence during sentencing to show that appellant previously had been convicted of battery in the second degree, the jury assessed a sentence of ten years on the felony charge and one year on each of the misdemeanor charges. In addition, the jury recommended fines of $2,500 on the felony and $1,000 on each misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced appellant to ten years' imprisonment and merged the misdemeanor sentences into the felony sentence. The trial court also gave appellant credit for 563 days spent in jail awaiting trial.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Rule 4-3(j) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, appellant's counsel has filed a motion to withdraw on grounds that the appeal is without merit. This motion is accompanied by an abstract and briefreferring to everything in the record that might arguably support an appeal. The clerk of this court furnished appellant with a copy of his counsel's brief and notified him of his right to file a pro se brief within thirty days. Appellant filed a brief addressing issues that were either wholly outside the record, raised for the first time on appeal, or fully covered in his counsel's brief.

From our review of the record and the briefs presented to us, we find compliance with Rule 4-3(j), and that the appeal is without merit. Accordingly, counsel's motion to be relieved is granted and the judgments of conviction are affirmed.

Affirmed.

Pittman and Robbins, JJ., agree