McKimm v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

McKimm v. State

742 S.W.2d 114, 294 Ark. 208, 1988 Ark. LEXIS 1

Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided January 13, 1988·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Petitioner, Raenita McKimm, by and through her attorneys, Hickam & Williams, P.A., has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. Her attorney, D. Scott Hickam, admits that the record was submitted late due to his miscalculation of the seven-month maximum limit for filing the record in this Court. See Ark. R. App. P. 5.

We find that such error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See per curiam dated February 5, 1979, 265 Ark. 964; Terry v. State, 272 Ark. 243 (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

Per Curiam.

Petitioner, Raenita McKimm, by and through her attorneys, Hickam & Williams, P.A., has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. Her attorney, D. Scott Hickam, admits that the record was submitted late due to his miscalculation of the seven-month maximum limit for filing the record in this Court. See Ark. R. App. P. 5.

We find that such error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See per curiam dated February 5, 1979, 265 Ark. 964; Terry v. State, 272 Ark. 243 (1981).

A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.

McKimm v. State, 742 S.W.2d 114, 294 Ark. 208, 1988 Ark. LEXIS 1 (Ark. 1988).

Pincite

742 S.W.2d 114 (McKimm v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related