Donald Ray Mouse, Jr. v. State of Arkansas
This text of 2025 Ark. App. 12 (Donald Ray Mouse, Jr. v. State of Arkansas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Cite as 2025 Ark. App. 12 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I No. CR-23-271
Opinion Delivered January 15, 2025
DONALD RAY MOUSE, JR. APPEAL FROM THE BENTON APPELLANT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 04CR-20-2182] V. HONORABLE BRAD KARREN, STATE OF ARKANSAS JUDGE APPELLEE REMANDED TO SETTLE AND SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD; REBRIEFING ORDERED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge
A jury found Donald Ray Mouse, Jr., guilty of robbery and third-degree battery, and
he has appealed his convictions. Mouse’s attorney has filed a no-merit brief and a motion
to withdraw as counsel pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(b)(1) (2024) and
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that this appeal is wholly without merit.
The clerk of this court mailed a copy of counsel’s motion and brief to Mouse’s last-known
address informing him of his right to file pro se points for reversal, and he has filed pro se
points. We remand the case to settle, if necessary, and supplement the record.
As we explained in Mace v. State, 2011 Ark. App. 472, we must have the entire record
of the circuit court proceedings to be able to properly review a criminal case that is presented
to us in an Anders no-merit format. See also Yancy v. State, 2024 Ark. App. 12; Campbell v. 1 State, 74 Ark. App. 277, 53 S.W.3d 48 (2001). If anything material to either party is omitted
from the record, either by error or by accident, we may direct that the omission or
misstatement be corrected and, if necessary, that a supplemental record be certified and
transmitted. Yancy, supra; Ark. R. App. P.–Crim. 4(a).
Here, as in Yancy, supra, the record itself does not contain matters that are essential
for our review. While Mouse designated the entire record and all proceedings in his notice
of appeal, the entire record is not currently before because the transcript of the voir dire of
the prospective jurors in this case is not included in the record. Arkansas Supreme Court
Administrative Order No. 4 provides that “[t]he circuit court shall require the official court
reporter to make a verbatim record of all proceedings pertaining to any matter before the
court or the jury.”
In addition, a request to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is wholly without
merit shall be accompanied by a brief, and the brief shall contain an argument section that
consists of a list of all rulings adverse to the defendant made by the circuit court on all
objections, motions, and requests made by either party with an explanation as to why each
adverse ruling is not a meritorious ground for reversal. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(b)(1). Here,
counsel has failed to discuss the legality of Mouse’s sentence of forty years’ imprisonment as
a habitual offender. See Price v. State, 2012 Ark. App. 33 (ordering rebriefing because
counsel did not discuss in argument portion of brief the legality of sentences).
We will not address this appeal until the record is settled and supplemented and the
case is rebriefed. We therefore remand this case for the record to be settled and
2 supplemented within thirty days.
We express no opinion on whether counsel should file a no-merit brief pursuant to
Rule 4-3(b)(1) and Anders or whether the brief should be an adversarial one. If counsel
elects to file another no-merit brief, he should first determine whether there are any adverse
rulings in the transcribed material following supplementation of the record. Counsel should
then include in a substituted brief an explanation regarding all the adverse rulings made
below as well as a discussion of the legality of Mouse’s sentence, as set forth above. This
noted deficiency may not be the only one, and counsel is strongly encouraged to review
Anders and Rule 4-3(b)(1) for the requirements of a no-merit brief.
After counsel has filed a substituted brief, which must take place within thirty days
after supplementation of the record, our clerk will forward counsel’s motion and substituted
brief to Mouse, and he will have thirty days within which to raise any pro se points he
chooses, or he may stand on the pro se points he has already submitted. The State will
likewise be given an opportunity to file a reply brief in light of the supplemental record and
in the event Mouse raises additional pro se points.
Remanded to settle and supplement the record; rebriefing ordered; motion to
withdraw denied without prejudice.
KLAPPENBACH, C.J., and MURPHY, J., agree.
Jeremy D. Wann, for appellant.
Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: Michael Zangari, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2025 Ark. App. 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donald-ray-mouse-jr-v-state-of-arkansas-arkctapp-2025.