Open main menu

Supreme Court of Arkansas

317 Ark. 286

Ronnie Reed  v.  State of Arkansas

Pro Se Motion for Access to Transcript

No. CR 94-375. --- Delivered: June 6, 1994. 

Court Documents
Per Curiam Decision
  1. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE—APPEAL OF DENIAL OF POST-CONVICTION RELIEF—WHEN DISMISSED.—An appeal of the denial of post-conviction relief will be dismissed where it is clear that the appeal is wholly without merit.

  1. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE—ALL GROUNDS FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF, INCLUDING CLAIMS THAT A SENTENCE WAS ILLEGALLY IMPOSED, MUST BE RAISED UNDER RULE 37—ANY CONFLICTS WITH STATUTES ARE RESOLVED IN FAVOR OF THE RULES.—Criminal Procedure Rule 37.2(b) provides in pertinent part that all grounds for post-conviction relief, including claims that a sentence is illegal or illegally imposed, must be raised in a petition under Rule 37; statutes are given deference only to the extent that they are compatible with our rules, and conflicts which compromise these rules are resolved with the rules remaining supreme.
  2. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE—STATUTE CONCERNING SENTENCES ILLEGALLY IMPOSED CONFLICTED WITH RULE—PETITIONS TO CORRECT SENTENCE NOT TIMELY, APPELLANT NOT ENTITLED TO RELIEF.—Where the appellant did not file his petitions to correct the sentence imposed on him within the time limit set by Rule 37, the petitions were untimely and he was not entitled to relief in circuit court; Arkansas Code Annotated § 16-90-111 (Supp. 1991) is in conflict with Criminal Procedure Rule 37 which in part provides that a petition under the rule is untimely if not filed within sixty days of issuance of the appellate court's mandate affirming the judgment of conviction; the time limitations imposed in Rule 37 are jurisdictional in nature, and the circuit court may not grant relief on a untimely petition.

Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; John Langston, Judge; Pro Se Motion for Access to Transcript denied and appeal dismissed.

Appellant, pro se.

No response.

[PER CURIAM decision of the court.]


This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."

These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).

Nuvola apps important.svg
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.