Aydelotte v. State. No. CR 04-822.Supreme Court of Arkansas. February 24, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication Motion for Extension of Time to File Substituted Appellant’s Brief granted in part and denied in part.
Articles Tagged: 361 Ark. XVI
DAVIS v. STATE, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Davis v. State. No. CR 03-953.Supreme Court of Arkansas. April 14, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication affirmed.
DOSS v. STATE, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Doss v. State. No. CR 04-460.Supreme Court of Arkansas. April 7, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication Motion for Duplication of Appellant’s Brief at Public Expense denied; pro se Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief granted […]
BENNETT v. STATE, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Bennett v. State. No. CR 03-690.Supreme Court of Arkansas. April 7, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication petition dismissed.
BRILEY v. STATE, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Briley v. State. No. CA CR 02-324.Supreme Court of Arkansas. March 10, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication Petition to Reinvest Jurisdiction in the Trial Court to Consider a Petition for Writ of Erro coram nobis denied.
COOPER v. JOHNSON, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Cooper v. Johnson. No. CR 05-84.Supreme Court of Arkansas. February 17, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication Petition for Writ of Mandamus moot.
BADER v. STATE, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Bader v. State. No. CR 04-1182.Supreme Court of Arkansas. March 3, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication Motion for Reconsideration denied.
BATTLE v. STATE, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Battle v. State. No. CR 05-44.Supreme Court of Arkansas. February 17, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication Motion for Belated Appeal of Judgment dismissed.
GILLIAM v. STATE, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Gilliam v. State. No. CR 04-1228.Supreme Court of Arkansas. February 17, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal granted. Page XVII
BLACKWELL v. STATE, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Blackwell v. State. No. CR 98-456.Supreme Court of Arkansas. February 24, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication Petition to Reinvest Jurisdiction in the Trial Court to Consider a Petition for Writ of Erro coram nobis denied.
DYAS v. NORRIS, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Dyas v. Norris. No. 05-101.Supreme Court of Arkansas. March 3, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication Petition for Writ of Certiorari moot; appeal dismissed.
DENNIS v. NORRIS, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Dennis v. Norris. No. 05-29.Supreme Court of Arkansas. March 3, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication Motion for Rule on Clerk; treated as motion for belated appeal and denied.
CLAIR’S ONE STOP v. ALLIED ASSOC., 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Clair’s One Stop, Inc. v. Allied Assoc., Inc. No. 05-128.Supreme Court of Arkansas. March 24, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis denied.
BROOKS v. STATE, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Brooks v. State. No. CR 03-538.Supreme Court of Arkansas. February 17, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication affirmed.
ENGRAM v. STATE, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Engram v. State. No. CR 03-1235.Supreme Court of Arkansas. April 14, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication affirmed.
DODSON v. STATE, 361 Ark. XVI (2005)
Dodson v. State. No. CR 02-1221.Supreme Court of Arkansas. April 7, 2005. [EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Pro se. PER CURIAM. Opinions not Designated for Publication affirmed.