Mayo v. State

908 S.W.2d 659, 322 Ark. 383, 1995 Ark. LEXIS 642
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided November 6, 1995·No. CR 95-802·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Mr. Mayo, through his attorney, Roy C. Lewellen, requests permission to file a belated transcript. In Mayo v. State, 321 Ark. 566, 906 S.W.2d 285 (1995), this court denied Mr. Mayo’s Motion for Rule on the Clerk because Mr. Lewellen had not accepted full responsibility for not timely filing the transcript.

Mr. Lewellen has now filed an affidavit in which he accepts full responsibility for tendering the transcript one day after the deadline. We find that such error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See per curiam order dated February 5, 1979. In re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964; Terry v. State, 272 Ark. 243, 613 S.W.2d 90 (1981).

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

Mayo v. State, 908 S.W.2d 659, 322 Ark. 383, 1995 Ark. LEXIS 642 (Ark. 1995).

908 S.W.2d 659 (Mayo v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Chlanda v. Estate of Fuller
932 S.W.2d 760 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1996)