Henderson v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Henderson v. State

936 S.W.2d 554, 327 Ark. 192, 1997 Ark. LEXIS 51

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedFebruary 3, 1997

DocketCR 97-53

StatusPublished

This text of 936 S.W.2d 554 (Henderson 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

Henderson v. State, 936 S.W.2d 554, 327 Ark. 192, 1997 Ark. LEXIS 51 (Ark. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Michael Henderson, by his attorney, has filed a motion for a rule on the clerk. We treat this motion as a motion for belated appeal.

His attorney, William McArthur, admits in his motion 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 In re Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964 (1979) (per curiam).

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.

Michael Henderson, by his attorney, has filed a motion for a rule on the clerk. We treat this motion as a motion for belated appeal.

His attorney, William McArthur, admits in his motion 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 In re Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964 (1979) (per curiam).

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)

936 S.W.2d 554, 327 Ark. 192, 1997 Ark. LEXIS 51, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henderson-v-state-ark-1997.