Case Title: Chauncey Hadley v. State of Arkansas

Citation: 

Docket Number: CR06-986

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 2006-10-26T00:00:00Z

Document:
ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT No. CR 06-986 NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION CHAUNCEY HADLEY Petitioner VS. STATE OF ARKANSAS Respondent Opinion Delivered October 26, 2006 PRO SE MOTION FOR BELATED APPEAL OF JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION [CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, CR 2004-02, HON. JOHN LANGSTON, JUDGE] MOTION DISMISSED PER CURIAM On January 11, 2005, judgment was entered reflecting that petitioner Chauncey Hadley had been found guilty by a jury of rape, two counts of aggravated robbery, and two counts of kidnapping. He was sentenced as a habitual offender to an aggregate term of 80 years’ imprisonment. No appeal was taken from the judgment, and petitioner, proceeding pro se, now seeks leave to proceed with a belated appeal. Belated appeals in criminal cases are governed by Rule 2(e) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure--Criminal. The rule provides in pertinent part that "no motion for belated appeal shall be entertained by the Supreme Court unless application has been made to the Supreme Court within eighteen (18) months of the date of entry of judgment...." Petitioner filed the motion for belated appeal here on September 5, 2006. The eighteen-month period to file a motion for belated appeal On May 5, 2005, petitioner filed in the trial court an untimely pro se notice of appeal 1 from the January 11, 2005, judgment. In response to the notice of appeal, the circuit clerk tendered a partial record to this court on July 29, 2005. A member of our staff advised petitioner that the record had been received but that our clerk had declined to lodge it because the notice was not timely. As stated, petitioner did not file his motion for belated appeal until approximately thirteen months later. 2– in the case elapsed on July 11, 2006. 1 It is incumbent on a petitioner to file a motion for belated appeal in a timely manner inasmuch as an untimely motion for belated appeal is subject to dismissal. Hayes v. State, 328 Ark. 95, 940 S.W.2d 886 (1997) (per curiam). As petitioner failed to file the motion within the period allowed by Ark. R. App. P.–Crim. 2(a), the motion is dismissed. Motion dismissed.