Legal Opinion

Pannell v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 1, 1995No. CR 94-452PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant was convicted of first degree battery. He appealed. We dismissed the appeal because no effective notice of appeal was filed. Pannell v. State, 320 Ark. 250, 895 S.W.2d 911 (1995). Appellant’s attorney subsequently filed a motion styled “Motion For A Belated Appeal” and has filed a pleading admitting it was her error that resulted in the failure to give an effective notice of appeal. She asks that, because of her error, we grant a belated appeal.

Under authority of A.R.Cr.P. Rule 36.9, we grant belated appeals because of attorneys’ errors, but those are granted before the case has…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pannell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1995
  2. Davis v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
  3. Krein v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Harris v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1997
  2. Smith v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1995
  3. Jordan v. Tyson Foods, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 1995
  4. Jordan v. Tyson Foods, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API