Court of Appeals

Decision Information

Decision Content

Cite as 2012 Ark. App. 26 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I No. CACR11735 Opinion Delivered January 4, 2012 BRENNAN KING APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT APPELLANT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, FOURTH DIVISION V. NO. CR2009-4199 STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE HERBERT WRIGHT, APPELLEE JR., JUDGE SUPPLEMENTATION OF ABSTRACT ORDERED WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge This is an appeal from a Pulaski County jury trial finding Brennan King guilty of one count of sexual assault in the second degree. Because the abstract does not comply with Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 42(a)(5), we cannot reach the merits and order appellant to file a supplemental abstract. Rule 42(a)(5) requires an appellant to create an abstract of the material parts of all the transcripts in the record. In his brief, appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction, but the abstract omits the testimony of numerous witnessesall of whom appear to have testified for the Statewhose testimony was considered by the jury in reaching its verdict. In fact, at least 200 pages of witness testimony is omitted entirely from the abstract submitted by appellant. Because this testimony is essential to understand the issues
Cite as 2012 Ark. App. 26 and decide this case on the merits, we order appellant to file a supplemental abstract within seven (7) calendar days of the entry of this opinion. 1 We strongly encourage appellate counsel, prior to filing the supplemental abstract, to review our rules as well as the abstract and addendum to ensure that no additional deficiencies are present. Supplementation of abstract ordered. WYNNE and ABRAMSON, JJ., agree. Mark Alan Jesse, for appellant. Dustin McDaniel, Atty Gen., by: William Andrew Gruber, Asst Atty Gen., for appellee. 1 See Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 42(b)(4). 2
 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.