Court Opinion

ID: 7824800
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-07 18:04:19.143332+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:30:49.829776
License: Public Domain

Robert H. Dudley, Justice. The jury found the appellees guilty of a misdemeanor. They moved for judgments notwithstanding the verdicts. The State objected and, among other things, contended that such judgments are not authorized by the Rules, of Criminal Procedure. See A.R.Cr.P. Rule 36.22. The trial court granted the judgments notwithstanding the verdicts. The State attempts to appeal the decision for the future guidance of trial courts. See A.R.Cr.P. Rule 36.10. We dismiss the appeal because the transcript was not filed within the sixty (60) day period as required by A.R.Cr.P. Rule 36.10(c), and we do not have jurisdiction. On June 4, 1990, the trial court entered the judgments of acquittal notwithstanding the verdicts of the jury. On July 2, 1990, the State timely filed its notice of appeal. However, the transcript was not filed until September 5,1990, which was more than sixty (60) days after the filing of the notice of appeal. The filing of the transcript within the sixty (60) day period as required by Rule 36.10(c) is jurisdictional. State v. Bland, 260 Ark. 511, 542 S.W.2d 497 (1976). Since we are without jurisdiction, we must dismiss the appeal. Newbern, J., not participating. 809 S.W.2d 821 JUNE 17, 1991 Winston Bryant, Att’y Gen., by: Sandy Moll, for appellant. Cross, Kearney & McKissic, by: Gene E. McKissic, for appellee.