Opinion
No. CR 86-89.
Opinion delivered June 9, 1986
1. APPEAL ERROR — APPELLANT WILL BE GRANTED RIGHT TO PROCEED PRO SE IF HE AGREES TO ABIDE BY THE RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT. — An appellant will he granted the right to proceed pro se if he agrees to abide by the rules of the supreme court. 2. APPEAL ERROR — CRIMINAL APPELLANT ENTITLED TO ATTORNEY ON APPEAL. — A criminal appellant is entitled to an attorney on appeal. 3. APPEAL ERROR — RIGHT TO COUNSEL ON APPEAL — WAIVER MUST BE INTELLIGENT. — If a criminal appellant elects to forgo the services of counsel, it is imperative that he do so intelligently and with full knowledge of his responsibilities. 4. APPEAL ERROR — PREREQUISITES TO PERMISSION TO APPEAL PRO SE. — Where it was not clear from appellant's motion that he was making an intelligent waiver of his right to counsel, his motion was denied until such time as he files a subsequent motion in which he states that he can abide by the rules of procedure, including the rule that all briefs he typewritten; he must further attach to the motion an affidavit refusing services of an attorney on appeal. 5. APPEAL ERROR — PRO BRIEF — AFFIDAVIT REQUIRED. — When a pro se brief is filed, the appellant must submit an affidavit verifying that he prepared the brief without the paid assistance of any inmate.
Pro Se Motion to Relieve Counsel and for Permission to Proceed Pro Se on Appeal; denied.
Appellant, pro se.
Steve Clark, Att'y Gen., by: Theodore Holder, Asst. Att'y Gen., for appellee.
On April 21, 1986 we granted appellant Clarence Gay permission to proceed with a belated appeal of his 1984 conviction for rape. We said that Joe Villines, the attorney who had represented Gay at trial, would continue to represent him on appeal. The record has been lodged with this Court and counsel's brief is scheduled to be filed June 28. Appellant now asks that Villines he relieved as counsel and he be permitted to proceed without the services of an attorney.
An appellant will be granted the right to proceed pro se if he agrees to abide by the rules of this Court. Green v. State, 277 Ark. 129, 639 S.W.2d 512 (1982); See also Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975). Appellant states that he will proceed with the appeal "nicely, as possible, and abide by all court rules," but he does not indicate whether he can submit a typewritten brief as required by the rules. He also has not submitted an affidavit refusing services of an attorney on appeal in accordance with our Rule 8(d).
[2-5] A criminal appellant is entitled to an attorney on appeal. If he elects to forgo the services of counsel, it is imperative that he do so intelligently and with full knowledge of his responsibilities. Since it is not clear from appellant's motion that he is making an intelligent waiver of his right to counsel, his motion will be denied until such time as he files a subsequent motion in which he states that he can abide by the rules of procedure, including the rule that all briefs be typewritten. He must further attach to the motion an affidavit refusing services of an attorney on appeal. When the brief is filed, he must submit an affidavit verifying that he prepared the brief without the paid assistance of any inmate. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 8(d).
Motion denied.
PURTLE, J., would grant.