Cook v. State, 2016 Ark. 328

Douglas Cook pleaded guilty on October 27, 2014, to four counts of rape and received an aggregate sentence of 720 months.
Cook filed a Rule 37.1 postconviction petition, but the Pope County Circuit Clerk did not file‑mark it promptly; Cook alleged this clerical error prevented timely lodging of the record on appeal.
Cook sought belated appeal and certiorari; the Supreme Court remanded for a file‑marked copy so the motion could be considered.
The circuit clerk later file‑marked the Rule 37.1 petition as July 8, 2015; the trial court denied relief on April 12, 2016, as untimely under Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.2(c).
The record was lodged April 22, 2016; Cook then moved for an extension to file a brief, for transcript, and for appointment of counsel.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal because it was clear Cook could not prevail: his Rule 37.1 petition was filed well beyond the 90‑day deadline for guilty pleas, and lack of law‑library access did not excuse the untimeliness.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Timeliness of Rule 37.1 petition	Cook argued the petition should be considered despite delay because the clerk’s failure to file‑mark and lack of law‑library access impeded timely filing.	State argued Rule 37.2(c) requires filing within 90 days of judgment for guilty pleas and petition was filed months late.	The petition was untimely under Rule 37.2(c); trial court lacked authority to grant relief.
Effect of clerk’s late file‑marking on appeal timing	Cook contended clerical error prevented lodging of the record and justified relief or belated appeal.	State maintained procedural rules control and untimeliness is dispositive.	Court remanded initially to obtain file‑marked petition but ultimately found untimeliness fatal and dismissed appeal.
Excuse for untimeliness based on lack of law‑library access	Cook asserted lack of access should excuse filing outside Rule 37.2(c) deadline.	State pointed to no rule permitting tolling for law‑library access issues.	Court held no provision permits extending the 90‑day limit for lack of library access; excuse rejected.
Remedies sought (extension, transcript, counsel)	Cook requested extension of time to file brief, transcript, and appointment of counsel.	State implicitly opposed because underlying appeal was meritless/timely-barred.	Appeal dismissed as Cook could not prevail; motions rendered moot.

Wheeler v. State, 463 S.W.3d 678 (per curiam) (dismissal appropriate when record shows appellant cannot prevail on postconviction appeal)
Engstrom v. State, 481 S.W.3d 435 (per curiam) (Rule 37.1 petition outside 90‑day period for guilty plea is untimely)