From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barnett v. Tabor

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Jan 14, 2010
2010 Ark. 22 (Ark. 2010)

Opinion

No. 09-1157

Opinion Delivered January 14, 2010

Pro se Motion for Rule on Clerk to file Petition for Writs of Prohibition or Certiorari and Mandamus without Certified Record, Pro se Motion to Stay Fees Pending Disposition of Motion for Rule on Clerk, and Pro se Motion for Appointment of Counsel [Circuit Court of Sebastian County, Ft. Smith District, CV 2009-1561], Motion for Rule on Clerk Denied; Motion to Stay Fees and Motion for Appointment of Counsel Moot.


Petitioner Matthew W. Barnett tendered to this court a pro se petition for writ of prohibition or certiorari and a pro se petition for writ of mandamus. The petitions were not filed because neither was accompanied by a certified record of the proceedings in the lower court. Petitioner then filed the instant pro se motion for rule on clerk seeking leave to file the petitions without a certified record. Petitioner also filed a pro se motion to stay the requirement that he pay a filing fee pending disposition of the motion for rule on clerk and a motion for appointment of counsel.

Rule 6-1(a) of this court provides that in cases in which the jurisdiction of this court is in fact appellate, although in form original, such as petitions for writs of prohibition, certiorari, or mandamus, the pleadings with certified exhibits from the trial court are treated as the record. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 6-1(a) (2009); Hall v. Griffin, 2009 Ark. 494 (per curiam); Dillard v. Keith, 336 Ark. 521, 986 S.W.2d 100 (1999) (per curiam). This court thus cannot assume jurisdiction of the petitions tendered in this matter without a certified record. Accordingly, the motion for rule on clerk is denied. The motions to stay the requirement to pay a filing fee and for appointment of counsel are moot.

Motion for rule on clerk denied; motion to stay fee and motion for appointment of counsel moot.

Bowen, J., not participating.


Summaries of

Barnett v. Tabor

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Jan 14, 2010
2010 Ark. 22 (Ark. 2010)
Case details for

Barnett v. Tabor

Case Details

Full title:Matthew W. BARNETT Petitioner v. Hon. Stephen TABOR, Circuit Judge, and…

Court:Supreme Court of Arkansas

Date published: Jan 14, 2010

Citations

2010 Ark. 22 (Ark. 2010)

Citing Cases

Wright v. Griffen

This court cannot assume jurisdiction of a mandamus action without a certified record. Barnett v. Tabor, 2010…

Paige v. State

Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 6-1(a) (2012) provides that in cases in which the jurisdiction of this court is…