Title: Jimmie Dyas v. State of Arkansas

State: arkansas

Issuer: Arkansas Supreme Court

Document:

ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT No. CR 07­928 JIMMIE DYAS Appellant v. STATE OF ARKANSAS Appellee Opinion Delivered December 6, 2007 PRO SE MOTIONS FOR COPY OF TRANSCRIPT AT PUBLIC EXPENSE AND FOR EXTENSION OF BRIEF TIME [CIRCUIT COURT OF LITTLE RIVER COUNTY, CR 75­4, HON. JOHN W. COLE, JUDGE] APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTIONS MOOT. PER CURIAM In 1975, appellant Jimmie Dyas, who is also known as Jimmy Lee Dyas, was convicted by a juryofcapitalfelonymurder and sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. This court affirmed. Dyas v. State, 260 Ark. 303, 539 S.W.2d 251 (1976). In 2007, appellant filed in the trial court a pro se petition to correct an illegal sentence. The trial court denied the petition without a hearing, and appellant has lodged an appeal here from the order. Now before us are appellant’s pro se motions for a copy of transcript at public expense and for extension of brief time. We need not consider the motions as it is apparent that appellant could not prevail in this appeal if it were permitted to go forward. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal and hold the motions moot. An order that denied a petition for postconviction relief will not be permitted to go forward where it is clear that the appellant could not prevail. Pardue v. State, 338 Ark. 606, 999 S.W.2d 198 (1999) (per curiam); Seaton v. State, 324 Ark. 236, 920 S.W.2d 13 (1996) (per curiam). 1 Act 578 of 1999 codified the Rule 37.1 time limitations imposed on section 16­90­111. 2 When appellant was charged and tried, murder was classified as capital felony, life felony without parole, life felony and felony. The judgment entered in this matter indicated that appellant was charged under the most severe definition of murder. ­2­ Appellant’s petition maintained that the sentence imposed was illegal as he was subjected to double jeopardy, denied equal protection of the law and actually innocent of the crime, and the trial judge erred in failing to automatically recuse from presiding over the matter. His petition was brought pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 16­90­111 (1987) (formerly Ark. Stat. Ann. § 43­2314 (Supp. 1983)). Under the language of the statute, which was enacted after appellant had been sentenced, “[a]ny circuit court, upon receipt of a petition by the aggrieved party . . . may correct an illegal sentence at any time and may correct a sentence imposed in an illegal manner within . . . one hundred twenty (120) days after the sentence is imposed.” At that time, the time limits in section 16­90­111 had not yet been superseded by the time limitations of Criminal Procedure Rule 37.1, as declared by this court in Harris v. State, 318 Ark. 599, 887 S.W.2d 514 (1994) (per curiam) and Reed v. State, 317 Ark. 286, 878 S.W.2d 376 (1994) (per curiam). 1 An illegal sentence is one that is illegal on its face. Lovelace v. State, 301 Ark. 519, 785 S.W.2d 212 (1990). We have previously observed that a sentence is “illegal on its face” when it exceeds the statutory maximum for the offense for which the defendant was convicted. Fritts v. State, 298 Ark. 533, 768 S.W.2d 541 (1989). In his petition, appellant made no argument that his sentence of life imprisonment without parole exceeded the statutorymaximumfor capitalmurder, and he cannot make such a showing under the statute. Appellant was originally tried in 1975 for capital felony murder under Ark. Stat. Ann. § 41­4702 (Supp. 1973). 2 At that time, capital felony murder was punishable by either death or life imprisonment without parole. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 41­4706 (Supp. 1973). As the sentence imposed on ­3­ appellant did not exceed the statutory maximum for the stated offense, it was not illegal on its face. Fritts, supra. Appellant failed to show that he was entitled to relief under the statute. Appeal dismissed; motions moot.