Quigley v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Quigley v. State

747 S.W.2d 92, 295 Ark. 167

Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided March 28, 1988·No. RC 88-6·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Petitioner, David Quigley, by his attorney, David M. Clark, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. His attorney admits that the record was tendered late due to his miscalculation of the ninety-day limit for filing the record in this court. See Ark. R. App. P. 5(a).

We find that such error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See Terry v. State, 272 Ark. 243 (1981); In re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964 (1979) (per curiam).

A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct. In re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964.

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

Per Curiam.

Petitioner, David Quigley, by his attorney, David M. Clark, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. His attorney admits that the record was tendered late due to his miscalculation of the ninety-day limit for filing the record in this court. See Ark. R. App. P. 5(a).

We find that such error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See Terry v. State, 272 Ark. 243 (1981); In re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964 (1979) (per curiam).

A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct. In re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964.

Quigley v. State, 747 S.W.2d 92, 295 Ark. 167 (Ark. 1988).

Pincite

747 S.W.2d 92 (Quigley v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related