Criminal Law · MBE-tested

Larry Darnell INGRAM v. STATE of Arkansas

330 Ark. 634955 S.W.2d 186·Arkansas Supreme Court·1997·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

Larry Darnell INGRAM v. STATE of Arkansas CR 97-1114 955 S.W.2d 186 Supreme Court of Arkansas Opinion delivered November 20, 1997 D. Kirk Joyce, for appellant. No response. [MAJORITY — Per Curiam.] Per Curiam. The appellant, Larry Darnell Ingram, has previously filed a motion for belated appeal. See Ingram v. State, 330 Ark. 218, 951 S.W.2d 314 (1997). We denied the motion because Ingram’s attorney, D. Kirk Joyce, had not admitted fault for failing to file the record in a timely manner. Mr. Joyce has since submitted an affidavit accepting responsibility for failing to timely file the transcript. We find that such an error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to treat the motion as one for rule on the clerk and grant the motion. See Harkness v. State, 264 Ark. 561, 572 S.W.2d 835 (1978). A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.