Case ID: ark_328/html/0139-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Tony ALAMO v. Christhiaon COLE
    97-318
    941 S.W.2d 425
    Supreme Court of Arkansas
    Opinion delivered April 14, 1997
    
      Eric M. Lieberman, for appellant.
    No response.
   Per Curiam.

Appellant Tony Alamo, by his attorney, Eric M. Lieberman, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk.

Appellant alleges that the Clerk of the Supreme Court rejected appellant’s petition for review because, as a matter of unwritten practice, “the Supreme Court does not review per curiam decisions of the Court of Appeals.” If appellant’s petition for review was indeed rejected for the reason stated by appellant’s counsel, the rejection would have been error. In any event, we have considered appellant’s petition for review and find that it has no merit.

The motion is, therefore, denied.