Case Title: Bryant v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: CR95-74-1

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 1996-01-16T00:00:00Z

Document:
Dale BRYANT v. STATE of Arkansas

CR 95-741                                          ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
               Opinion delivered January 16, 1996


1.   Appeal & error -- A.R.Cr.P. Rule 37 -- only two claims
     cognizable in Rule 37 proceedings. --  When a defendant pleads
     guilty, the only claims cognizable in A.R.Cr.P. Rule 37
     proceedings are those that allege that the plea was not made
     voluntarily and intelligently or was entered without effective
     assistance of counsel.

2.   Appeal & error -- A.R.Cr.P. Rule 37 -- conclusory allegations
     unsupported by facts do not provide basis for hearing or
     postconviction relief. -- Conclusory allegations totally
     unsupported by facts do not provide a basis for a hearing or
     for postconviction relief.

3.   Appeal & error -- A.R.Cr.P. Rule 37 -- allegations in twenty-
     three page document not considered. -- Where, sixteen months
     after he filed his Rule 37 petition, appellant filed a twenty-
     three page document entitled "Rule 37--WRITTEN ARGUMENT," the
     supreme court held that the trial judge was correct in
     refusing to consider it; A.R.Cr.P. Rule 37.1 (e) provides that
     a petition shall not exceed ten pages in length; Rule 37.2(b)
     provides that all grounds for relief must be raised in the
     original petition, and Rule 37.2(e) provides that in order to
     amend his petition, a petitioner must ask leave of the court; 
     In filing the twenty-three page document, the appellant did
     not ask the court's permission either to file an overlength
     document or to amend his original petition with the latter
     document; therefore, the allegations in the latter document
     were not considered.

4.   Appeal & error -- A.R.Cr.P. Rule 37 -- judge who presided over
     defendant's trial can also preside over defendant's
     postconviction proceeding. -- The judge who presides over a
     defendant's trial can also preside over that defendant's
     postconviction proceeding; moreover, recusal is not required
     when some of the judge's rulings are  considered in the Rule
     37 proceedings. 

5.   Judges -- disqualification discretionary -- no abuse of
     discretion in decision not to recuse. -- A circuit judge's
     decision not to recuse from a case is a discretionary one and
     will not be reversed on appeal absent an abuse of that
     discretion; where comments by the trial judge that appellant
     claimed indicated prejudice against him were made when the
     circuit court ruled on the appellant's motion some sixteen
     months after it was filed, the supreme court held that it
     would consider only the facts set forth in the motion that the
     trial court ruled on and found that there was no abuse of
     discretion in the trial court's decision not to recuse.


     Appeal from Boone Circuit Court; Robert McCorkindale, Judge;
affirmed.
     John Putman, for appellant.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  Vada Berger, Asst. Att'y
Gen., for appellee.

     Per Curiam.January 16, 1996







DALE BRYANT
     Appellant


v.


STATE OF ARKANSAS
     Appellee




CR 95-741


APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT
OF BOONE COUNTY, (NO. CR 92-
35), HONORABLE ROBERT
MCCORKINDALE, JUDGE



AFFIRMED





                           Per Curiam.


     
      The appellant, Dale Bryant, pleaded guilty to capital murder
on 
August 18, 1992. His plea was conditional on his right to appeal an
adverse ruling by the trial court on a motion to suppress his
inculpatory statements.  The appellant was sentenced to life
without parole.  On September 13, 1993, the Arkansas Supreme Court
affirmed the trial court's denial of the suppression motion. 
Bryant v. State, 314 Ark. 130,