Britton v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Britton v. State

861 S.W.2d 114, 314 Ark. 220, 1993 Ark. LEXIS 488

Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided September 20, 1993·No. CR 93-832·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Billy J. Britton, by his attorney, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk.

The motion admits that the record was not timely filed and that it was no fault of the appellant.

However, the motion does not state good cause for granting the motion as discussed in our per curiam issued February 5, 1979, 265 Ark. 964. If the attorney for Billy J. Britton will concede that it was his fault that the record was not filed, or if other good cause is shown, then the motion will be granted. The present motion for rule on the clerk is denied.

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

Per Curiam.

Billy J. Britton, by his attorney, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk.

The motion admits that the record was not timely filed and that it was no fault of the appellant.

However, the motion does not state good cause for granting the motion as discussed in our per curiam issued February 5, 1979, 265 Ark. 964. If the attorney for Billy J. Britton will concede that it was his fault that the record was not filed, or if other good cause is shown, then the motion will be granted. The present motion for rule on the clerk is denied.

Britton v. State, 861 S.W.2d 114, 314 Ark. 220, 1993 Ark. LEXIS 488 (Ark. 1993).

Pincite

861 S.W.2d 114 (Britton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related