Title: Demarco T. Wilson v. State of Arkansas
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: CR02-26
State: Arkansas
Issuer: Arkansas Supreme Court
Date: March 7, 2002

ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION PER CURIAM MARCH 7, 2002 DEMARCO T. WILSON Petitioner v. STATE OF ARKANSAS Respondent CR 02-26 PRO SE MOTION FOR BELATED APPEAL OF ORDER [CIRCUIT COURT OF CRITTENDEN COUNTY, NO. CR 97-439C, HON. DAVID BURNETT, JUDGE] MOTION DISMISSED In 1997, DeMarco T. Wilson was found guilty by a jury of capital murder and sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. We affirmed. Wilson v. State, 338 Ark. 178, 992 S.W.2d 89 (1999). Wilson subsequently filed a timely petition for postconviction relief pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule 37 in the trial court. The petition was denied on June 12, 2000. No appeal was taken, and Wilson now seeks leave to proceed with a belated appeal of the order. Before any examination of the merits of the motion for belated appeal can be undertaken, it must be determined whether the motion was timely filed. We conclude that it was not and dismiss the motion. Hayes v. State, 328 Ark. 95, 940 S.W.2d 886 (1997). On December 10, 2001, petitioner Wilson tendered to this court a pro se motion seeking leave to proceed with a belated appeal of the order. The motion could not be filed at that time because petitioner failed to tender with it the record, or at the least a partial record, of the lower court proceedings which is required before a motion for belated appeal will be filed in this court. Petitioner was promptly notified of the need to provide this record. On January 3, 2002, the partial record was received from petitioner, and the motion was filed. Belated appeals in criminal cases are governed by Rule 2(2) 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...the order denying postconviction relief...." Petitioner filed the motion here eighteen months and twenty-two days after the order was entered. It is incumbent on a petitioner to file the motion in a timely manner if the petitioner desires this court to consider whether to permit a belated appeal. Hayes, supra. The petitioner here did not do so and thus waived his right to appeal from the order. Motion dismissed. Corbin, J., not participating.