Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

540 WILLIAMS V. STATE [314 Cite as 314 Ark. 540 (1993) Frank WILLIAMS, Jr. v. STATE of Arkansas CR 93-988 861 S.W.2d 551 Supreme Court of Arkansas Opinion delivered October 25, 1993 APPEAL & ERROR WRIT OF CERTIORARI GRANTED REPORTER ORDERED TO COMPLETE AND FILE TRANSCRIPT FORTHWITH.
ARK.] WILLIAMS V. STATE 541 Cite as 314 Ark. 540 (1993) Where, on request for reconsideration of appellant's petition for writ of certiorari, appellant tendered the affidavit of the court reporter, stating that she has been unable to prepare the record in the case, but if given an additional thirty days, she would do so, the appellate court granted appellant's petition for writ of certiorari and directed the court reporter to complete and file the transcript forthwith. Motion for Reconsideration of Denial of Request for Writ of Certiorari; granted. Thomas A. Potter, for appellant. No response. PER CURIAM. For his motion for reconsideration of this court's denial of his September 10, 1993 request for writ of certiorari, appellant tenders the affidavit of Betty Voltz, court reporter, which states that she has been unable to prepare the record in this case, but given an additional thirty days, she will do so. Appellant had obtained a court order extending the time to file the transcript in this cause until September 12, 1993, which date was the maximum length of time to lodge such transcript with this court. Prior to September 12, 1993, appellant timely filed his motion requesting the court reporter to file the record in this matter, but having stated no reason for the delay, we denied his request. [1] The court, having now been given the reason for the transcript not having been timely filed, grants appellant's petition for writ of certiorari and directs Ms. Voltz to complete and file the transcript forthwith. The court forwards a copy of this per curiam to the Board of Certified Reporter Examiners for any action it may deem necessary under its rules. CORBIN, J., not participating.
 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.