Opinion
Opinion delivered November 9, 1987
APPEAL ERROR — FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH RULES — MOTION DENIED. — Where petition to proceed as a pauper failed to comply with Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 28 and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus failed to state a grounds which made a substantial showing that petitioner was entitled to relief, the petitions were denied.
Pro Se Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and to File a Handwritten Brief; denied.
Appellant, pro se.
No response.
Petitioner has filed handwritten petitions to be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis a nd for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition to proceed as a pauper fails to comply with Rule 28 of the Rules of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus fails to state grounds which make a substantial showing that petitioner is entitled to relief. The petitions are, therefore, denied. See Glick v. Lockhart, 288 Ark. 417, 706, S.W.2d 178 (1986) and Hayes v. Lockhart, 288 Ark. 419, 706 S.W.2d 179 (1986).
PURTLE, J., dissents.