Legal Opinion

Hicks v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 24, 1996No. CR 96-482PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Appellant, Randolph George Hicks, by his attorneys, has filed a motion for a rule on the clerk. Consistent with our direction in Hicks v. State, 324 Ark. 450, 921 S.W.2d 604 (1996) (per curiam), his attorneys, Wayne Emmons and Edward Witt Chandler, admit by motion and affidavit that the notice of appeal was filed untimely due to a mistake on their part. This court has held that it will treat a motion for rule on the clerk as a motion for belated appeal and grant the motion when counsel admits that the notice of appeal was not timely filed due to an error on his part. See, e.g., Brown v.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hicks v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1996
  2. Brown v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1995

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Waddle v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API