King v. State
2016 Ark. 450
| Ark. | 2016Background
- In 2011, Christopher Dean King, Sr. pled guilty to theft by receiving and received 60 months’ imprisonment followed by a 36‑month suspended imposition of sentence.
- In 2012, the State petitioned to revoke the suspension alleging new burglary, unemployment, and unpaid restitution/costs; the suspension was revoked and King was resentenced to 420 months. The court of appeals affirmed; mandate issued June 11, 2013.
- King filed a timely, verified Rule 37.1 postconviction petition; the trial court denied relief on January 28, 2016.
- King filed a notice of appeal on February 16, 2016 but did not lodge the record with the Arkansas Supreme Court within the 90‑day deadline; he tendered the record and moved for a rule on the clerk on September 8, 2016 (174 days after the notice).
- King blamed the circuit clerk for failing to respond to his letters requesting copies, but he did not file any motion for extension within the 90‑day period.
- The Supreme Court denied King’s motion for rule on the clerk because he failed to show good cause for the late lodging; all other motions were rendered moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether King should be allowed a belated appeal / rule on clerk to lodge the record | King contends the circuit clerk’s failure to respond to his requests prevented timely lodging of the record | State argued appellant is responsible for perfecting the appeal and King showed no good cause or timely motion for extension | Denied: King failed to show good cause; responsibility to lodge record rests with appellant |
Key Cases Cited
- Raglon v. State, 2016 Ark. 219 (per curiam) (treating a belated‑appeal request as a motion for rule on clerk when a notice of appeal was timely filed)
- Purifoy v. State, 2015 Ark. 353 (per curiam) (appellant, not circuit clerk, must perfect appeal)
- Belts v. State, 2013 Ark. 72 (per curiam) (pro se litigants must comply with procedural rules or show good cause)
- Nutt v. State, 2015 Ark. 103 (per curiam) (compliance with appellate rules required for expeditious appeals)
- Upshaw v. State, 2014 Ark. 166 (per curiam) (claim that clerk alone is responsible to perfect appeal is unfounded)
- Bragg v. State, 2016 Ark. 242 (per curiam) (timely filing and lodging requirements for appellate record)