Criminal Law · MBE-tested

Michael Daniel HERRINGTON v. STATE of Arkansas

283 Ark. 231674 S.W.2d 505·Arkansas Supreme Court·1984·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

Michael Daniel HERRINGTON v. STATE of Arkansas 674 S.W.2d 505 Supreme Court of Arkansas Opinion delivered September 10, 1984 Bruce D. Switzer, for appellant. Steve Clark, Att’y Gen., by: Theodore G. Holder, Asst. Att’y Gen., for appellee. [MAJORITY — Per Curiam.] Per Curiam. Appellant, Michael Daniel Herrington, by his attorney, has filed for a rule on the clerk. His attorney, Bruce D. Switzer, admits that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part. We find that such an error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See our Per Curiam opinion dated February 5,1979, In Re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases. A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.