Morrissey v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Morrissey v. State

917 S.W.2d 167, 323 Ark. 803, 1996 Ark. LEXIS 181

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedMarch 18, 1996

DocketCR 96-245

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 917 S.W.2d 167 (Morrissey 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

Morrissey v. State, 917 S.W.2d 167, 323 Ark. 803, 1996 Ark. LEXIS 181 (Ark. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellant Dan Morrissey was convicted in a bench trial in 1994 of attempted rape and sentenced to seven years imprisonment; no appeal was taken. Morrissey has filed a timely motion for belated appeal. See Rule 2(e) of the Revised Rules of Appellate Procedure — Criminal; A.R.Cr.P. Rule 36.9 (predecessor of Rule 2(e)). When a good reason for the omission is shown by affidavit, this Court may act upon and decide a case in which the notice of appeal was not given. Rule 2(e) of the Revived Rules of Appellate Procedure — Criminal; A.R.Cr.P. Rule 36.9 (superseded); see also Davis v. State, 319 Ark. 171, 889 S.W.2d 769 (1994) (decided under A.R.Cr.P. Rule 36.9).

In the instant case, Morrissey contends his failure to file a timely notice of appeal was predicated on erroneous advice by his trial counsel. Morrissey’s affidavit states that he strongly expressed to his trial counsel his desire to appeal. However, according to the affidavit, Morrissey’s counsel informed him that he stood the risk of being again charged with rape, rather than only attempted rape, where he could face a life sentence. Morrissey also submits he was advised that appealing his sentence would be futile because he would go before the same judge. Morrissey avers that his trial counsel did not advise him that the trial judge could sentence him to a harsher sentence only if some additional conduct had occurred since the sentencing.

In sum, Morrissey submits that his trial counsel’s advice constituted ineffective assistance of counsel and such a reason constitutes good cause for the failure to file a notice of appeal. Morrissey’s trial counsel, Ed Webb, has not responded to the motion. However, there is no indication that Mr. Webb was ever served with a copy of the motion. Consequently, we remand this case to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing and Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on the question of whether Morrissey knowingly waived his right to appeal the conviction. See Salam v. State, 300 Ark. 630, 781 S.W.2d 30 (1989).

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

Per Curiam.

Appellant Dan Morrissey was convicted in a bench trial in 1994 of attempted rape and sentenced to seven years imprisonment; no appeal was taken. Morrissey has filed a timely motion for belated appeal. See Rule 2(e) of the Revised Rules of Appellate Procedure — Criminal; A.R.Cr.P. Rule 36.9 (predecessor of Rule 2(e)). When a good reason for the omission is shown by affidavit, this Court may act upon and decide a case in which the notice of appeal was not given. Rule 2(e) of the Revived Rules of Appellate Procedure — Criminal; A.R.Cr.P. Rule 36.9 (superseded); see also Davis v. State, 319 Ark. 171, 889 S.W.2d 769 (1994) (decided under A.R.Cr.P. Rule 36.9).

In the instant case, Morrissey contends his failure to file a timely notice of appeal was predicated on erroneous advice by his trial counsel. Morrissey’s affidavit states that he strongly expressed to his trial counsel his desire to appeal. However, according to the affidavit, Morrissey’s counsel informed him that he stood the risk of being again charged with rape, rather than only attempted rape, where he could face a life sentence. Morrissey also submits he was advised that appealing his sentence would be futile because he would go before the same judge. Morrissey avers that his trial counsel did not advise him that the trial judge could sentence him to a harsher sentence only if some additional conduct had occurred since the sentencing.

In sum, Morrissey submits that his trial counsel’s advice constituted ineffective assistance of counsel and such a reason constitutes good cause for the failure to file a notice of appeal. Morrissey’s trial counsel, Ed Webb, has not responded to the motion. However, there is no indication that Mr. Webb was ever served with a copy of the motion. Consequently, we remand this case to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing and Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on the question of whether Morrissey knowingly waived his right to appeal the conviction. See Salam v. State, 300 Ark. 630, 781 S.W.2d 30 (1989).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

917 S.W.2d 167, 323 Ark. 803, 1996 Ark. LEXIS 181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morrissey-v-state-ark-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack