ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT No. 09-66 Opinion Delivered February 12, 2009 PRO SE PETITION FOR WRIT OF TOMMY HALL MANDAMUS [CIRCUIT COURT OF Petitioner MILLER COUNTY, CV 2004-285] v. PETITION MOOT. HON. JIM HUDSON, CIRCUIT JUDGE Respondent PER CURIAM On January 26, 2009, petitioner Tommy Hall filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in this court. In the petition, he contended that the Honorable Jim Hudson, Circuit Judge, had failed to act in a timely manner on a motion seeking an amended judgment in a civil matter. 1 On January 29, 2009, respondent Hudson provided this court with a copy of a letter order entered January 15, 2009, that disposed of petitioner’s request that the judgment be amended. As the court has acted in in the matter, the petition for writ of mandamus is moot. Because petitioner also asks that this court amend the judgment, it may be that the petitioner is seeking review of the judgment by means of this mandamus action. If so, his remedy was an appeal from the judgment, not a mandamus action in this court. Mandamus is not a substitute for 1 The judgment was entered February 22, 2007, in a forfeiture action, State v. Two Thousand Seven Hundred Fifteen Dollars ($2,715.00) in U. S. Currency and Tommy Hall, CV 2004-285, Circuit Court of Miller County. The record in this mandamus action contains two pro se motions to amend the judgment, the first filed October 17, 2008, and the second filed November 12, 2008.
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.