Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

Cite as 2015 Ark. 14 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS IN RE NINTH EAST JUDICIAL Opinion Delivered January 15, 2015 CIRCUITAPPROVAL FOR DIGITAL ELECTRONIC RECORDING PER CURIAM Circuit Judge Robert McCallum, of the Ninth East Judicial Circuit, requests permission from this court, pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Administrative Order No. 4(e), to use digital electronic recording to make the official court record. Administrative Order No. 4 permits the use of digital electronic recording in the circuit courts under special circumstances, such as presented here, upon request to, and approval by, the supreme court. Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 18, digital electronic recording may be used by state district judges who are presiding over matters pending in the circuit courts. The use of digital electronic recording is also permitted in many state and federal courts throughout the country. See the National Center for State Courts publication, Making the Record Utilizing Digital Electronic Recording. 1 We grant this request for a one-year period. The use of digital electronic recording in Judge McCallums court shall comply with Administrative Order No. 4, the Administrative 1 Lee Suskin, James McMillan, and Daniel J. Hall, Making the Record Utilizing Digital Electronic Recording, National Center for State Courts (September 2013) https//www.ncsc.org/services-and-experts/court-reengineering/~/media/files/pdf/services%20and%experts/court%20reengineering/09012013-making-digital-record.ashx
Cite as 2015 Ark. 14 Office of the Courts Provisional Guidelines for Digital Audio Recording, 2 and the terms set out in Judge McCallums Proposal for the Use of Electronic Reporting in the 9th Judicial Circuit of Arkansas.” 2 Administrative Office of the Courts, Provisional Guidelines for Digital Audio Recording in State District Courts (July 1, 2011), https://courts.arkansas.gov/sites/default/files/tree/guidelines.pdf 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.