Wicoff v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Wicoff v. State

814 S.W.2d 267, 306 Ark. 401, 1991 Ark. LEXIS 399

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedSeptember 9, 1991

DocketRC 91-44

StatusPublished

This text of 814 S.W.2d 267 (Wicoff 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

Wicoff v. State, 814 S.W.2d 267, 306 Ark. 401, 1991 Ark. LEXIS 399 (Ark. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellant, Jimmy Lane Wicoff, by his áttor-

ney, Christopher Carter has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. His attorney admits that the record was tendered late because the ninety-day limit for filing the record in this Court, see Ark. R. App. P. 5(a), was not extended by a new trial motion with respect to which no record was made. See Ark. R. App. P. 4(c).

We find that such error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See per curiam dated February 5, 1919, In re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964; Terry v. State, 272 Ark. 243, 613 S.W.2d 90 (1981).

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