Jones v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
2016 Ark. 389
Ark.2016Background
- Appellant Jamie Jones sought a belated appeal after the Court of Appeals dismissed her appeal for lack of jurisdiction because her notice of appeal lacked Jones’s signature.
- Counsel John Ogles admitted fault for failing to procure his client’s signature in violation of Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 6-9(b)(2)(D).
- The omission led to dismissal by the Arkansas Court of Appeals (Jones v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2016 Ark. App. 470).
- The Supreme Court reviewed the motion under the McDonald standard, which distinguishes failures caused by counsel/party fault from those justified by a “good reason.”
- The Court noted that counsel’s candid admission of fault is appropriate and that similar protections under McDonald apply to parents in termination cases.
- The Court granted the motion for belated appeal and forwarded a copy of the opinion to the Committee on Professional Conduct.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a belated appeal should be allowed after counsel failed to obtain appellant’s signature on the notice of appeal | Jones (through counsel) moved for a belated appeal and counsel admitted fault for the missing signature | DHS opposed dismissal consequences based on procedural defect (implicit) | Court granted belated appeal where counsel candidly admitted fault under McDonald standard |
| Whether McDonald standard applies and whether counsel should admit fault (affidavit requirement) | Jones relied on McDonald and counsel admitted fault in the motion (no separate affidavit required) | DHS did not contest applicability; Court has applied McDonald to parental-rights contexts | Court reaffirmed McDonald approach; candid admission of counsel fault is appropriate and motion considered and granted |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonald v. State, 356 Ark. 106 (2004) (sets out fault vs. good-reason framework for belated appeals)
- Garcia v. Ark. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 374 Ark. 144 (2008) (applies McDonald protections to parents in termination contexts)
- Smith v. Ark. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 371 Ark. 425 (2007) (per curiam) (granting belated appeal in termination-of-parental-rights case)