Criminal Law · MBE-tested

Richard Harold MAXWELL v. STATE of Arkansas

351 Ark. 67497 S.W.3d 418·Arkansas Supreme Court·2003·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

Richard Harold MAXWELL v. STATE of Arkansas CR 03-55 97 S.W.3d 418 Supreme Court of Arkansas Opinion delivered February 6, 2003 David L. Chambers, for appellant. No response. [MAJORITY — Per Curiam.] Per Curiam. Appellant Richard Harold Maxwell, by and through his attorney, David L. Chambers, has filed a motion for rule on clerk. Mr. Chambers, states in the motion that his motion to extend the time to file the record was not filed in timely fashion 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.