Legal Opinion

Daffron v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided July 15, 1996No. CR 96-14PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Appellant Ricky Daffron, through his counsel, seeks permission to file a supplemental abstract and substituted brief in connection with his appeal of the denial of a Rule 37 petition. The State asks that we deny Daffron’s motion because counsel for the State pointed out in its brief that Daffron failed to abstract the order denying his Rule 37 petition and argued that the case should be affirmed on this basis.

The State acknowledges that in Wilson v. State, 306 Ark. 179, 810 S.W.2d 337 (1991), this court permitted appellant’s counsel to file a supplemental abstract and brief in a Rule 37…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Peterson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1986
  2. Dixon Ticonderoga Co. v. Winburn Tile Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1995
  3. Harris v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993
  4. Jones v. McCoolSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
  5. Wilson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hamel v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API