BREWTON V. STATE 364 Cite as 375 Ark. 364 (2009) [375 Kenneth Dana BREWTON v. STATE of Arkansas CR 08-1042 290 S.W3d 605 Supreme Court of Arkansas
Opinion delivered January 15, 2009 MOTIONS — MOTION FOR RULE ON CLERK — TREATED AS MOTION FOR BELATED APPEAL AND GRANTED WHERE ATTORNEY ADMITTED FAULT FOR FAILING TO TIMELY FILE APPELLANT'S BRIEF. — A criminal appellant's belated brief will be accepted to prevent an appeal from being aborted; however, good cause must be shown to grant the motion; here, appellant's attorney accepted full responsibility and admitted fault for failing to timely file appellant's brief; accordingly, the motion for rule on clerk was treated as a motion for belated appeal and granted. Motion for Rule on Clerk; treated as Motion for Belated Appeal and granted.
BREWTON V. STATE ARK.] Cite as 375 Ark. 364 (2009) 365 David L. Dunagin, for appellant No response. ER. CURIAM. Appellant Kenneth Dana Brewton, by and p through his counsel David L. Dunagin, moves this court for leave to file a belated brief.' Brewton's brief was due in this court on October 14, 2008. After no brief was filed, the State filed a motion to dismiss on December 8, 2008. Thereafter, Brewton tendered his brief and filed the instant motion requesting to file the belated brief. We will accept a criminal appellant's belated brief to prevent an appeal from being aborted. See Brown v. State, 373 Ark. 453, 284 S.W.3d 481 (2008) (per curiam). However, good cause must be shown to grant the motion. See Strom v. State, 356 Ark. 224, 147 S.W.3d 689 (2004) (per curiam) (holding that appellate counsel's admitted failure to timely file the brief constituted good cause to grant motion for belated brief). [1] Here, Brewton's attorney accepts full responsibility and admits fault for failing to timely file Brewton's brief. Accordingly, we grant the motion to file a belated brief and refer the matter to the Committee on Professional Conduct. ' Appellant's motion is captioned as one for rule on clerk, but we will treat it as a motion for belated brief.
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.