Pennington v. Lockhart
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Tom Glaze, Justice.
Appellant brings this pro se appeal from the trial court’s denial of appellant’s petition for declaratory judgment requesting that his parole eligibility be correctly determined.1 He has failed to abstract any of the record. In addition, the three courts’ sentencing orders needed to determine parole eligibility are omitted from the transcript.
We hold pro se litigants to the abstracting requirement of Rule 9 of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. Bryant v. Lockhart, 288 Ark. 302, 705 S.W.2d 9 (1986); Walker v. State, 283 Ark. 339, 676 S.W.2d 460…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Walker v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1984
- Bryant v. LockhartSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1986
- Pennington v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1987
3Cited by3 opinions
- Fruit v. LockhartSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
- Allen v. RoutonCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1997
- Taylor v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989