Billings v. State, 2016 Ark. 404

In 2009, Fredrico Rainer Billings pled guilty to delivery of a counterfeit substance and delivery of a controlled substance and was sentenced as a habitual offender to 480 months’ imprisonment.
In 2010 Billings filed a pro se petition to correct or reduce sentence under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-90-111; no action was taken on that petition until 2016.
On February 9, 2016, Billings requested a certified copy of the record from the circuit clerk to pursue relief in this court; a tendered mandamus petition related to the 2010 filing was not filed.
The trial court entered an order on March 17, 2016, denying the 2010 petition; Billings timely filed a pro se notice of appeal on April 12, 2016.
Billings failed to timely tender the record to the Arkansas Supreme Court within the 90-day period required by Rule of Appellate Procedure–Civil 5(a); he moved to proceed with a “belated appeal,” arguing the circuit clerk was responsible for perfecting the appeal.
The Supreme Court treated the request as a motion for rule on clerk to lodge the record belatedly and denied it, holding Billings failed to show good cause for not timely tendering the record and that the appellant—not the clerk—must perfect an appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Billings)	Defendant's Argument (State / Court)	Held
Whether a belated appeal (rule on clerk) should be allowed where appellant timely filed notice but failed to timely lodge the record	Billings contends the circuit clerk was responsible for complying with procedural rules and perfecting the appeal, so a belated lodging should be allowed	The court (and State) argues the appellant bears the duty to perfect the appeal and must show good cause for failure to timely lodge the record	Denied: appellant failed to show good cause; appellant, not clerk, must timely tender the record
Whether pro se status excuses noncompliance with appellate procedure	Billings implies pro se status and clerk’s duty excuse his noncompliance	Court holds pro se litigants must conform to procedural rules or show good cause for noncompliance	Pro se status is not an automatic excuse; must demonstrate good cause

Raglon v. State, 2016 Ark. 219 (treating belated-appeal requests as motions for rule on clerk when notice of appeal was timely)
Purifoy v. State, 2015 Ark. 353 (appellant, not clerk, must perfect the appeal)
Butler v. State, 2015 Ark. 173 (same principle reaffirmed)
Belts v. State, 2013 Ark. 72 (pro se litigants must conform to procedural rules or show good cause)
Nutt v. State, 2015 Ark. 103 (compliance with appellate rules required for expeditious handling)
Upshaw v. State, 2014 Ark. 166 (rejection of claim that clerk bears sole responsibility to perfect appeal)
Bragg v. State, 2016 Ark. 242 (Rule 5(a) timing and lodging obligations explained)