Baker v. State

934 S.W.2d 531, 326 Ark. 1096, 1996 Ark. LEXIS 718
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Baker v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 326 Ark. 580
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided December 23, 1996·No. CR 96-502·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is the appellant’s second motion for an extension of time to file a belated brief. The brief was originally due on June 8, 1996. Appellant’s counsel, Tell Hulett, filed the first motion for an extension of time on October 15, 1996. In the motion, he stated that our clerk’s office had directed all correspondence to an old address; thus he had not received a briefing schedule. We granted the motion by per curiam issued November 11, 1996. See Baker v. State, 326 Ark. 580, 931 S.W.2d 443 (1996). Since counsel had not made any inquiries regarding the case for more than five months after the record was filed, we forwarded a copy of our opinion to the Committee on Professional Conduct.

It appears that a copy of the November 11 per curiam was also sent to Mr. Hulett at his old address. That oversight has now been corrected by our clerk’s office. We will grant the second motion to file a belated brief. The brief is now due on January 2, 1996. However, we must, again, forward a copy of our opinion to the Committee on Professional Conduct. Counsel did not inquire about the status of the motion until November 25, 1996, nor has a brief been tendered at any time since the original due date of Tune 8, 1996.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Baker v. State, 934 S.W.2d 531, 326 Ark. 1096, 1996 Ark. LEXIS 718 (Ark. 1996).

934 S.W.2d 531 (Baker v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Baker v. State
931 S.W.2d 443 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1996)