Clayton v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Clayton v. State

890 S.W.2d 602, 319 Ark. 291, 1995 Ark. LEXIS 28

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedJanuary 17, 1995

DocketCR 94-1446

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 890 S.W.2d 602 (Clayton v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Clayton v. State, 890 S.W.2d 602, 319 Ark. 291, 1995 Ark. LEXIS 28 (Ark. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The appellant, Douglas James Clayton,

has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. His attorney, Ralph M. Cloar, Jr., admits that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part. We find that such admission of fault by an attorney in a criminal case is good cause to grant the motion. See Tarry v. State, 288 Ark. 172, 702 S.W.2d 904 (1986).

The motion is therefore granted. A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.

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

Per Curiam.

The appellant, Douglas James Clayton,

has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. His attorney, Ralph M. Cloar, Jr., admits that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part. We find that such admission of fault by an attorney in a criminal case is good cause to grant the motion. See Tarry v. State, 288 Ark. 172, 702 S.W.2d 904 (1986).

The motion is therefore granted. A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

890 S.W.2d 602, 319 Ark. 291, 1995 Ark. LEXIS 28, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clayton-v-state-ark-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack