Newborn v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Newborn v. State

194 S.W.3d 770, 359 Ark. 160

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedOctober 7, 2004

DocketCR 04-989

StatusPublished

This text of 194 S.W.3d 770 (Newborn 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

Newborn v. State, 194 S.W.3d 770, 359 Ark. 160 (Ark. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellant Alexander Newborn, by and through his attorney, Alan LeVar, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. Attorney LeVar states in the motion that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part.

We find that such an error, admittedly made by an 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).

The motion is, therefore, granted. 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 Alexander Newborn, by and through his attorney, Alan LeVar, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. Attorney LeVar states in the motion that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part.

We find that such an error, admittedly made by an 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).

The motion is, therefore, granted. A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 S.W.3d 770, 359 Ark. 160, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newborn-v-state-ark-2004.