Case Title: Dale Edward Vaughn v. State of Arkansas

Citation: 

Docket Number: CR02-35

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 2002-03-21T00:00:00Z

Document:
ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION PER CURIAM MARCH 21, 2002 DALE EDWARD VAUGHN Appellant v. STATE OF ARKANSAS Appellee CR 02-35 PRO SE MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF [CIRCUIT COURT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, NO. CR 95-762 and CR 96-182, HON. WILLIAM A. STORY, JUDGE] APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION MOOT On January 20, 1999, an amended judgment was entered reflecting that Dale Edward Vaughn had pleaded guilty to six felony offenses and had been sentenced to an aggregate term of 288 months' imprisonment. Credit against the sentence for time served in custody awaiting trial was afforded in the amount of 233 days. On May 25, 2001, Vaughn filed in the trial court a pro se motion seeking to have the judgment modified to reflect additional time served. The court denied the motion, and the record has been lodged here on appeal. Now before us is a motion filed by appellant Vaughn seeking an extension of time to file the appellant's brief. Because we find that the trial court did not err when it denied relief, the appeal is dismissed. The motion is moot. This court has consistently held that an appeal of the denial of postconviction relief will not be permitted to go forward where it is clear that the appeal is wholly without merit. Seaton v. State, 324 Ark. 236, 920 S.W.2d 13 (1996); Harris v. State, 318 Ark. 599, 887 S.W.2d 514 (1994); Reed v. State, 317 Ark. 286, 878 S.W.2d 376 (1994); see Chambers v. State, 304 Ark. 663, 803 S.W.2d 932 (1991); Johnson v. State, 303 Ark. 560, 798 S.W.2d 108 (1990); Williams v. State, 293 Ark. 73, 732 S.W.2d 456 (1987). The motion to modify the judgment was a petition for postconviction relief and, as such, was governed by Criminal Procedure Rule 37. Under the provisions of Rule 37, appellant was procedurally barred from proceeding under the rule in that the motion filed in the trial court was untimely. Rule 37.2(c) provides that all grounds for postconviction relief from a judgment must be raised in a petition under the rule filed within ninety days of entry of judgment pursuant to a plea of guilty. The appellant here did not file his motion challenging the judgment within the ninety-day period set by Rule 37. The time limitations imposed in Rule 37 are jurisdictional in nature, and the circuit court may not grant relief on a untimely postconviction petition. Maxwell v. State, 298 Ark. 329, 767 S.W.2d 303 (1989). Appeal dismissed; motion moot.