Criminal Law · MBE-tested

Andre Lamont CRAWFORD v. STATE of Arkansas

358 Ark. 364190 S.W.3d 910·Arkansas Supreme Court·2004·AR

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

Andre Lamont CRAWFORD v. STATE of Arkansas CR 04-768 190 S.W.3d 910 Supreme Court of Arkansas Opinion delivered September 9,2004 Robert A. Newcomb, for appellant. No response. [MAJORITY — Per Curiam.] Per Curiam. Appellant, Andre Lamont Crawford, by and riam. attorney, Robert A. Newcomb, has filed a motion for rule on clerk. Mr. Newcomb admits responsibility for failing to timely file the record due to a mistake on his part. We find that such an error, admittedly made by an attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See In Re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964 (1979) (per curiam). The motion is, therefore, granted. A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.