Foster v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Foster v. State

873 S.W.2d 153, 316 Ark. 438

Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided March 21, 1994·No. CR 94-229·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Bryon Foster, by his attorney, has filed a motion for a rule on the clerk.

His attorney, William Luppen, admits by motion and brief that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part.

We find that such an error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See our Per Curiam opinion In Re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964 (1979).

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

Dudley and Corbin, JJ., not participating.

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

Per Curiam.

Bryon Foster, by his attorney, has filed a motion for a rule on the clerk.

His attorney, William Luppen, admits by motion and brief that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part.

We find that such an error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See our Per Curiam opinion In Re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964 (1979).

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

Dudley and Corbin, JJ., not participating.

Foster v. State, 873 S.W.2d 153, 316 Ark. 438 (Ark. 1994).

Pincite

873 S.W.2d 153 (Foster v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.