Sumlin v. State

883 S.W.2d 480, 318 Ark. 105, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 498
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Sumlin v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 319 Ark. 312
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided September 26, 1994·No. CR 94-362·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Undra Sumlin, by his attorney, Matthew J. Ketcham, has filed a motion to file a belated record. We treat this as a motion for belated appeal.

His attorney, Matthew J. Ketcham, admits by motion that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part in calculating the forty-five days for filing the record pursuant to our per curiam of July 11, 1994.

We find that such an error, admittedly made by the 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

Sumlin v. State, 883 S.W.2d 480, 318 Ark. 105, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 498 (Ark. 1994).

883 S.W.2d 480 (Sumlin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.