Purifoy v. Griffen , 2015 Ark. 56 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                        Cite as 
    2015 Ark. 56
    
                       SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
                                            No.   CR-14-1008
    
    IVORY PURIFOY                                      Opinion Delivered February   19, 2015
                                   PETITIONER
                                                       PRO SE PETITION FOR WRIT OF
    V.                                                 MANDAMUS
                                                       [PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
                                                       NOS. 60CR-96-871, 60CR-96-1346]
    HON. WENDELL LEE GRIFFEN,
    JUDGE
                      RESPONDENT
                                                       AMENDED RESPONSE REQUESTED.
    
    
                                             PER CURIAM
    
    
           Petitioner Ivory Purifoy, an inmate incarcerated in the Arkansas Department of
    
    Correction (ADC), filed a pro se petition for declaratory judgment in two criminal cases, 60CR-
    
    96-871 and 60CR-96-1346, in the Pulaski County Circuit Court on June 27, 2014. The petition
    
    sought relief concerning the ADC’s calculation of petitioner’s parole eligibility for his criminal
    
    convictions in the two cases. On November 25, 2014, petitioner filed a petition for writ of
    
    mandamus in this court alleging that Honorable Wendell Lee Griffen, the circuit judge assigned
    
    to the matter, had failed to timely dispose of the petition for declaratory judgment. The petition
    
    seeking the writ requested that this court direct the judge to issue a ruling on the petition for
    
    declaratory judgment.
    
           Judge Griffen filed a response to the petition for the writ in which he avers that the
    
    matter has been disposed of through a written order entered on December 3, 2014. In support
    
    of that proposition, Judge Griffen attached a copy of the December 3, 2014 order. We note,
                                               Cite as 
    2015 Ark. 56
    
    however, that the order appears to address only one of the two criminal cases, 60CR-96-1346.1
    
    Because it is not clear whether the order attached to the response was intended to also dispose
    
    of the matter in regard to 60CR-96-871, we request Judge Griffen to file an amended response
    
    within ten days of this order addressing whether the December 3, 2014 order was intended to
    
    encompass 60CR-96-871.
    
           Amended response requested.
    
           Ivory Purifoy, pro se petitioner.
    
           Dustin McDaniel, Att’y Gen., by: Rebecca B. Kane, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for respondent.
    
    
    
    
           1
             The notation on the order is that it is entered in 60CV-96-1346. While the civil
    designation appears to be a simple typographical error and the petition for declaratory judgment
    is referenced, there is no reference to 60CR-96-871.
                                                        2
    

Document Info

DocketNumber: CR-14-1008

Citation Numbers: 2015 Ark. 56

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 2/19/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 3/3/2016