Ingram v. State

955 S.W.2d 186, 330 Ark. 634, 1997 Ark. LEXIS 709
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Ingram v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 330 Ark. 218
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided November 20, 1997·No. CR 97-1114·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The appellant, Larry Darnell Ingram, has previously filed a motion for belated appeal. See Ingram v. State, 330 Ark. 218, 951 S.W.2d 314 (1997). We denied the motion because Ingram’s attorney, D. Kirk Joyce, had not admitted fault for failing to file the record in a timely manner. Mr. Joyce has since submitted an affidavit accepting responsibility for failing to timely file the transcript.

We find that such an error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to treat the motion as one for rule on the clerk and grant the motion. See Harkness v. State, 264 Ark. 561, 572 S.W.2d 835 (1978). 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

Ingram v. State, 955 S.W.2d 186, 330 Ark. 634, 1997 Ark. LEXIS 709 (Ark. 1997).

955 S.W.2d 186 (Ingram v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Harkness v. State
572 S.W.2d 835 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1978)
Ingram v. State
951 S.W.2d 314 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1997)