Opinion ID: 1498170
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Lack of meaningful means to obtain post-conviction relief

Text: In Whitmore v. State, 299 Ark. 55, 771 S.W.2d 266 (1989), we abolished our former Ark.R.Crim.P. 37. which was our rule on post-conviction relief. In an accompanying per curiam order we amended Rule 36.4. to require a person convicted of a crime to be notified he had 30 days in which to move for a new trial on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel. In the Matter of the Abolishment of Rule 37. and the Revision of Rule 36. of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure, 299 Ark. 573, 770 S.W.2d 148 (1989). We subsequently reinstated Rule 37 in a modified form, but Coulter's case came under Rule 36.4. He argues the Rule allowed him neither practical means nor opportunity to obtain counsel to help determine whether he had reason to complain of his trial counsel. During the 30-day period after he was sentenced, Coulter filed a motion styled Notice of Non-Waiver of Any Claim of Ineffective Assistance of Counsel in which he stated he planned to raise any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel he might have at the first meaningful opportunity. He did not move for a new trial or ask the court to appoint counsel to assist him in making a timely decision whether to move for a new trial. As we have no court order to review on this point, and the motion made by Coulter has no bearing on the finding of guilt or the sentence, we discuss it no further.