Legal Opinion

Henderson v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 21, 2001No. CR 01-616PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Jacinto Henderson, by his attorney, Q. Byrum Hurst, Jr., has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. The motion admits that the record was not timely filed and that it was no fault of the appellant.

This court has held that we will grant a motion for rule on clerk when the attorney admits that the record was not timely filed due to an error on his part. See, e.g., Tarry v. State, 288 Ark. 172, 702 S.W.2d 804 (1986). Here, the attorney does not admit fault on his part, but instead implies fault on the part of the court reporter and the clerk of the lower court. We have held that a statement that…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Tarry v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1986
  2. Clark v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1986

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. McINTOSH v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API