Thе appellant, James O. Williams, appeals the Saline County Circuit Court’s August 6, 2008 dismissal of his appeal from a November 15, 2007 Saline County District Court conviction on charges of Driving While Intoxicated 3rd Offense, Careless & Prohibited Driving, and Disorderly Conduct. Subsequent to appellant’s conviction, for which he was fined $2,205 and sentenced to ninety days in jаil for the DWI-3rd conviction, he filed a notice of appeal to the Saline County Circuit Court on December 14, 2007. He filed the district-court transcript with the circuit clеrk on December 21, 2007.
The State filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on June 3, 2008, on the basis that the thirty-day deadline for filing the certified copy of the district-court transcript required by [2Rule 36(b) — (d) (2008) of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure had expired prior to appellant’s filing thereof. Pursuant to Rule 36, the transcript had to have been filed on or before December 17, 2007, 1 which was thirty days after the entry of the district-court judgment.
A hearing on the State’s motion to dismiss appellant’s appeal was held before the circuit court on August 4, 2008. At the conclusion of the hearing, the circuit judge indicated that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction based upon appеllant’s failure to timely perfect his appeal. An order dismissing the appeal and remanding the case back to district court for enforcement of the previous judgment was filed on August 6, 2008. An order declaring appellant indigent and appointing counsel for purposes of appeal was entered by the circuit court on August 29, 2008, and a timely notice of appeal was filed on that same day.
Pursuant to Anders v. California,
As this is a no-merit appeal, counsel is required to list eaсh ruling adverse to the defendant and to explain why each adverse ruling does not present a meritorious ground for reversal. See Anders, supra; Ark. Sup.Ct. R. 4-3(k)(l); Eads v. State,
Counsel submits that the only adverse ruling is the circuit court’s granting of the State’s motion to dismiss the appeal from district court to circuit court. The basis for the circuit court’s ruling was that the district-court transcript was not filed with the circuit-court clerk within thirty days of the entry of the district-court judgment. Appellant’s counsel exрlains that, while it is unclear why there was a delay in the filing of the district-court transcript, it is undisputed that it was not filed within the time period prescribed by Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procеdure 36.
| ¿The filing requirement of Rule 36 is strictly enforced and is jurisdictional in nature. Counsel cites Edwards v. City of Conway,
Interestingly, the circuit judge in this case specifically noted that he previously had been reversеd for failing to grant the State’s motion for relief requesting dismissal of a district-court appeal that had not been timely filed. See State v. Dawson,
Regarding appellant’s pro se points, he first argues that the testimony of a police officer who tеstified at his trial in district court was not credible. The State correctly acknowledges that there is no verbatim transcript of the district-court proceeding, so the 1 r,content of the police officer’s testimony is unknown. Moreover, this appeal is from the order dismissing appellant’s appeal to circuit court rаther than from his conviction in district court. The police officer’s credibility was not an issue in the dismissal of the appeal and is not at issue before this court. Finally, wеighing the evidence and assessing the credibility of witnesses are matters for the fact-finder. Bush v. State,
For his second pro se point, appellant claims that his attorney visited with him only one time regarding the case. The State contends, and we agree, that if his argument is to be construed as a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, that issuе was never presented to the circuit court. Accordingly, this court will not consider it for the first time on appeal. Taylor v. State,
Finally, appellant claims that his failure to timely file the district-court transcript was due to the inaction of the circuit clerk’s office — specifically, that the clerk refused to stay and complete her job on the day he attempted to timely file the district-court transcript. Rule 36 expressly provides that it is a defendant’s burden to ensure that his appеal is perfected in a timely manner. The State cites Ottens v. State,
From our review of the record and the briefs presented to us, we find cоmpliance with Rule 4-3(k), and hold that the appeal is without merit. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to be relieved is granted, and the order dismissing the appeal from district court to circuit court is affirmed.
Affirmed; motion to be relieved granted.
Notes
. Appellant’s filing period began to run on Thursday, November 16, 2007. The thirtieth day thereafter fell on Saturday, December 15, 2007. Accordingly, the deadline for filing was the following business day, Monday, December 17, 2007.