Court Opinion

ID: 7823309
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-07 18:01:24.88109+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:30:47.790975
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam. The appellant was convicted on March 7,1985 and filed a notice of appeal on April 8,1985. The record was thus due in the clerk’s office within 90 days of the filing of the notice of appeal. On March 7> 1986 the appellant’s attorney, Michael R. Salamo, filed a motion for a rule on clerk to lodge the transcript claiming that the attorney-client relationship necessary for effective assistance had dissolved which affected a timely filing of this transcript. On March 24, 1986, this court remanded the case to the trial court for a determination of the attorney-client relationship existing between the parties. On May 3,1986 the trial court held a hearing and found that the attorney-client relationship existed at the time the transcript should have been filed and still exists. The attorney filed a second motion for rule on clerk on behalf of the appellant on June 16, 1986, which stated the same grounds.  In similar circumstances we have held we will not permit a record to be filed unless the attorney assumes full responsibility for presenting it late. Tarry v. State, 288 Ark. 172, 702 S.W.2d 804 (1986). A statement that it was someone else’s fault or no one’s fault will not suffice. Moore v. State, 268 Ark. 191, 600 S.W.2d 1 (1980).  If the appellant’s attorney files a motion and affidavit in this case accepting full responsibility for not perfecting the appeal, then the motion will be granted. That negligence will be duly noted and a copy of the opinion granting the motion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.