Lambert v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Lambert v. State

884 S.W.2d 626, 318 Ark. 327, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 562

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedOctober 17, 1994

DocketCR 94-1037

StatusPublished

This text of 884 S.W.2d 626 (Lambert 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

Lambert v. State, 884 S.W.2d 626, 318 Ark. 327, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 562 (Ark. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellant has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. His attorney, Robert P. Remet, admits that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part. We find that such admission of fault by an attorney in a criminal case is good cause to grant the motion. See Tarry v. State 288 Ark. 172, 702 S.W.2d 904 (1986).

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.

Appellant has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. His attorney, Robert P. Remet, admits that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part. We find that such admission of fault by an attorney in a criminal case is good cause to grant the motion. See Tarry v. State 288 Ark. 172, 702 S.W.2d 904 (1986).

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)

884 S.W.2d 626, 318 Ark. 327, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 562, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lambert-v-state-ark-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack