Latta v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Latta v. State

48 S.W.3d 532, 345 Ark. 573, 2001 Ark. LEXIS 435

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedJuly 9, 2001

DocketCR 01-679

StatusPublished

This text of 48 S.W.3d 532 (Latta 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

Latta v. State, 48 S.W.3d 532, 345 Ark. 573, 2001 Ark. LEXIS 435 (Ark. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellant, Mark Latta, by his attorney, R.S. McCullough, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. Following a jury verdict finding Latta guilty of manufacturing a controlled substance, the Saline County Circuit Court sentenced appellant to life imprisonment in the Arkansas Department of Correction. The judgment and commitment order was entered on June 30, 2000. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal on July 14, 2000, and ultimately tendered the appellate record on February 5, 2001. However, due to a miscalculation in due dates and admitted “inadvertence,” the record was lodged outside the applicable time limits.

Mr. McCullough admits in the instant 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). Accordingly, we grant the motion for rule on the clerk. A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct. Id.

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

Per Curiam.

Appellant, Mark Latta, by his attorney, R.S. McCullough, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. Following a jury verdict finding Latta guilty of manufacturing a controlled substance, the Saline County Circuit Court sentenced appellant to life imprisonment in the Arkansas Department of Correction. The judgment and commitment order was entered on June 30, 2000. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal on July 14, 2000, and ultimately tendered the appellate record on February 5, 2001. However, due to a miscalculation in due dates and admitted “inadvertence,” the record was lodged outside the applicable time limits.

Mr. McCullough admits in the instant 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). Accordingly, we grant the motion for rule on the clerk. A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct. Id.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 S.W.3d 532, 345 Ark. 573, 2001 Ark. LEXIS 435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/latta-v-state-ark-2001.