Matthews v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Matthews v. State

884 S.W.2d 264, 318 Ark. 232, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 534

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedOctober 10, 1994

DocketCR 94-1007

StatusPublished

This text of 884 S.W.2d 264 (Matthews 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

Matthews v. State, 884 S.W.2d 264, 318 Ark. 232, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 534 (Ark. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellant, Shirley Matthews, by her attorney, has filed for a rule on the clerk.

Her attorney, Phillip Crego, admits that the failure to file the record in time was 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 our Per Curiam opinion dated February 5, 1979, In Re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964. 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, Shirley Matthews, by her attorney, has filed for a rule on the clerk.

Her attorney, Phillip Crego, admits that the failure to file the record in time was 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 our Per Curiam opinion dated February 5, 1979, In Re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964. 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 264, 318 Ark. 232, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 534, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matthews-v-state-ark-1994.