Legal Opinion

Tice v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 2, 2006No. CR 06-114PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

J. Michael Helms, a part-time public defender for the Fifth Judicial District, was appointed by the trial court to represent Appellant Carl Tice. Helms petitions this court to be relieved as counsel on appeal because the Arkansas Public Defender Commission has ordered all public defenders to refrain from filing any fee petitions with the Arkansas appellate courts, as a result of this court’s decision in Rushing v. State, 340 Ark. 84, 8 S.W.3d 489 (2000). The motion is denied.

Ark. Code Ann. § 19-4-1604(b)(2)(A) (Supp. 2005) addresses the restrictions placed upon state employees who draw…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Rushing v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
  2. Smith v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2006

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Flowers v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2007
  2. Calhoun v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2007
  3. Walker v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2009
  4. White v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API