Marshall v. State , 2017 Ark. 125 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                     Cite as 
    2017 Ark. 125
    SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
    No.   CR-16-63
    Opinion Delivered: April   13, 2017
    KENNETH RAY MARSHALL
    APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE COLUMBIA
    COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
    V.                            [NO. 14CR-14-2]
    STATE OF ARKANSAS                           HONORABLE HAMILTON H.
    APPELLEE SINGLETON, JUDGE
    SUPPLEMENTAL RECORD
    ORDERED; SUBSTITUTED
    BRIEFING ORDERED.
    PER CURIAM
    A jury found appellant, Kenneth Ray Marshall, guilty of aggravated residential
    burglary and commercial burglary, and he was sentenced as a habitual offender to life
    imprisonment for the former and thirty years’ imprisonment for the latter, with the sentences
    to run consecutively. Because Marshall received a sentence of life imprisonment, this court
    “must review all errors prejudicial to the appellant in accordance with Ark. Code Ann. §
    16-91-113(a).” Ark. Sup.Ct. R. 4-3(i) (2016). Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(i) further
    provides as follows:
    To make that review possible, the appellant must abstract, or include in the
    Addendum, as appropriate, all rulings adverse to him or her made by the circuit court
    on all objections, motions and requests made by either party, together with such parts
    of the record as are needed for an understanding of each adverse ruling. The Attorney
    General will make certain and certify that all of those objections have been abstracted,
    or included in the Addendum, and will brief all points argued by the appellant and
    any other points that appear to involve prejudicial error.
    Cite as 
    2017 Ark. 125
    In reviewing the record, the abstract, and the addendum, we have discovered that
    both the docket sheet and the circuit court’s statements at trial indicate that the circuit court
    held a hearing on January 14, 2015, regarding a motion for speedy trial and a motion for a
    change of venue. According to the docket sheet and the circuit court’s statements, both
    motions were denied. Though Marshall designated the entire trial record as the record on
    appeal, the record does not contain a transcript of that hearing. Thus, the record on appeal
    is incomplete. Without a complete record, this court cannot conduct a meaningful review
    of the denial of these two motions, as Rule 4-3(i) requires. Romes v. State, 
    355 Ark. 497
    ,
    
    139 S.W.3d 519
    (2003) (per curiam) (holding that the court could not conduct a meaningful
    review of an adverse ruling without a complete record).
    Accordingly, we order that a supplemental certified transcript of the hearing be filed
    with the clerk of this court within thirty days from the date of this per curiam. Once the
    transcript has been filed, we direct the parties to file with this court substituted briefs that
    satisfy their respective obligations under Rule 4-3(i), with the clerk of this court to set a
    briefing schedule.
    Also, despite both Marshall’s obligation under Rule 4-3(i) to abstract or include in
    the addendum all rulings adverse to him and the Attorney General’s certification that
    Marshall had done so, we note that there are adverse rulings in the current record that were
    not abstracted. Accordingly, we further order the parties to reexamine the entire record and
    complete their respective duties under Rule 4-3(i).
    Supplemental record ordered; substituted briefing ordered.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: CR-16-63

Citation Numbers: 2017 Ark. 125

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 4/13/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/13/2017