Robinson v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Robinson v. State

873 S.W.2d 514, 316 Ark. 587, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 226

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedApril 11, 1994

DocketCR 93-1273

StatusPublished

This text of 873 S.W.2d 514 (Robinson 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

Robinson v. State, 873 S.W.2d 514, 316 Ark. 587, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 226 (Ark. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Leon Robinson was convicted of a felony and filed a timely appeal with this Court. His brief was due January 11, 1994, but his counsel, Jan Thornton, failed to file the brief on time. She contends she did not receive notice from the Office of the Clerk of this Court setting the briefing schedule, but she acknowledges it was her responsibility to file the brief on time.

While we deem the explanation for the failure to present the brief to this Court inadequate, we grant the motion to file a belated brief because this is a criminal case and we cannot allow failure of counsel to deprive a criminal defendant of his appeal. The matter is referred to the Committee on Professional Conduct for whatever investigation and possible action it may deem proper. Stone v. State, 288 Ark. 472, 705 S.W.2d 441 (1986).

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

Per Curiam.

Leon Robinson was convicted of a felony and filed a timely appeal with this Court. His brief was due January 11, 1994, but his counsel, Jan Thornton, failed to file the brief on time. She contends she did not receive notice from the Office of the Clerk of this Court setting the briefing schedule, but she acknowledges it was her responsibility to file the brief on time.

While we deem the explanation for the failure to present the brief to this Court inadequate, we grant the motion to file a belated brief because this is a criminal case and we cannot allow failure of counsel to deprive a criminal defendant of his appeal. The matter is referred to the Committee on Professional Conduct for whatever investigation and possible action it may deem proper. Stone v. State, 288 Ark. 472, 705 S.W.2d 441 (1986).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

873 S.W.2d 514, 316 Ark. 587, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 226, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-state-ark-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack