Tull v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Tull v. State

78 S.W.3d 714, 349 Ark. 248, 2002 Ark. LEXIS 350

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedJune 6, 2002

DocketCR 02-509

StatusPublished

This text of 78 S.W.3d 714 (Tull 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

Tull v. State, 78 S.W.3d 714, 349 Ark. 248, 2002 Ark. LEXIS 350 (Ark. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellant Marvin W. Tull. by and through his attorney, has filed a motion for a rule on the clerk. His attorney, Joe Kelly Hardin, 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 wiE 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 Marvin W. Tull. by and through his attorney, has filed a motion for a rule on the clerk. His attorney, Joe Kelly Hardin, 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 wiE be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 S.W.3d 714, 349 Ark. 248, 2002 Ark. LEXIS 350, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tull-v-state-ark-2002.