Title: Ellis F. Kinard v. State of Arkansas

State: arkansas

Issuer: Arkansas Supreme Court

Document:

ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT No. CR 03-860 NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION October 21, 2004 ELLIS F. KINARD APPELLANT v. STATE OF ARKANSAS, APPELLEE Opinion Delivered APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NO. CR 93-1806, HON. MARION ANDREW HUMPHREY, JUDGE AFFIRMED PER CURIAM Appellant pleaded guilty to rape, and the circuit court imposed a sentence of twenty years' imprisonment. Judgment was entered on May 17, 1995. Almost eight years later, appellant filed a motion in the circuit court requesting 177 days credit for time spent in custody of the county jail. The circuit court denied the motion. We affirm. The circuit court was without jurisdiction to grant relief because appellant untimely filed his petition almost eight years after judgment was entered against him. A request for jail time credit is a request for modification of a sentence imposed in an illegal manner. Cooley v. State, 322 Ark. 348, 350, 909 S.W.2d 312, 313 (1995)(citing Delph v. State, 300 Ark. 492, 780 S.W.2d 527 (1989)). A claim that a sentence was illegally imposed must be raised in a petition filed within ninety days of the date of entry of judgment if the conviction was obtained on a plea of guilty. Ark. R. Cr. P. 37.2 (1995); see also Reed v. State, 317 Ark. 286, 878 S.W.2d 378 (1994)(holding that Ark. R. Cr. P. 37superseded the time limits imposed in Ark. Code Ann. § 16-90-111 for correction or reduction of a sentence)1. Rule 37's time limits are jurisdictional in nature, and the circuit court may not grant relief on a untimely petition for postconviction relief. E.g. Reed, supra. Affirmed. 1 The remedy provided by Criminal Procedure Rule 37.1 is to be distinguished from petitions for writs of habeas corpus which are filed not in the sentencing court but in the court in the jurisdiction in which the petitioner is in custody. Taylor v. State, 354 Ark.450, 125 S.W.3d 174 (2003).