Fry v. State

817 S.W.2d 211, 307 Ark. 120, 1991 Ark. LEXIS 512
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided October 28, 1991·No. RC 91-56·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Bennie L. Fry, Jr., 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 appellee.

However, the motion does not state good cause for granting the motion as discussed in our per curiam, In Re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964 (1979). If the attorney for Fry 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

Fry v. State, 817 S.W.2d 211, 307 Ark. 120, 1991 Ark. LEXIS 512 (Ark. 1991).

817 S.W.2d 211 (Fry v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.