Opinion ID: 6342120
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: jurisdiction

Text: Jurisdiction is a matter that we are obligated to raise on our own motion. See Scott v. State, 2012 Ark. 199, 406 S.W.3d 1. On the basis of Woodward’s assertions, had a Rule 37.1 postconviction petition been received at the same time the “civil complaint” appears to have been received and not been filed through some error of the clerk, Woodward’s petition would have been timely filed. See Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.2 (c)(i) (If a conviction was obtained on a plea of guilty, a petition claiming relief under this rule must be filed in the appropriate circuit court within ninety days of the date of entry of judgment.). However, we were not able to determine whether we had jurisdiction over this matter without previously remanding the matter. 3 Upon remand, the circuit court determined that Woodward sent certain documents to the Chicot County Circuit Clerk at an unknown time before December 3, 2018, for filing; however, no document or any motion to vacate made it to the court file. Further, the court determined that the prosecutor responded to a motion that he received in his office some time before January 16, 2019, but the document that prompted the prosecutor’s response was not available and could not be provided to the court. Ultimately, the circuit court was “unable to ascertain what caused the delay [in file-marking] the document and that [t]here was not enough information to determine if there were additional pleadings.” The findings of the circuit court do not establish that a motion to vacate was received to be filed within the ninety-day time frame to be considered timely for postconviction relief. As such, the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to address the merits of Woodward’s postconviction petition. When the circuit court lacks jurisdiction, the appellate court also lacks jurisdiction. See Grant v. State, 2020 Ark. 282; Clark v. State, 362 Ark. 545, 210 S.W.3d