State v. Payton
This text of 2015 Ark. 31 (State v. Payton) 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.
Opinion
Cite as 2015 Ark. 31
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CR-14-872
STATE OF ARKANSAS Opinion Delivered January 29, 2015 APPELLANT MOTION TO FILE BELATED BRIEF V.
MARK E. PAYTON APPELLEE MOTION GRANTED.
PER CURIAM
Appellee Mark. E. Payton, by and through his attorney, Philip A. Moon, has filed a
motion to file a belated brief, and seeks an extension of time for a period of thirty days in
which to file the brief.
On December 19, 2014, at appellee’s request, Attorney Moon filed a motion to
withdraw as counsel on appeal. Appellant, the State of Arkansas, had filed its brief on
November 19, 2014, so appellee’s brief was due on December 19, 2014. Through
inadvertence, Attorney Moon did not ask for an extension of time to file a brief at the same
time that he filed the motion to withdraw. On January 10, 2015, Attorney Moon received
an order of this court denying his motion to withdraw. Attorney Moon has now requested
a new due date for appellee’s brief.
The motion to file a belated brief is granted. Appellee has thirty days from the date
of this per curiam to file his brief.
Motion granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2015 Ark. 31, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-payton-ark-2015.