Martinez-Marmol v. State

Full title: GILBERTO MARTINEZ-MARMOL APPELLANT v. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE

Court: ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II

Date published: Jan 30, 2013

2013 Ark. App. 46 (Ark. Ct. App. 2013)

Opinion

No. CACR12-190

01-30-2013

GILBERTO MARTINEZ-MARMOL APPELLANT v. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE

Carey E. Lyles Dowdy, for appellant. Dustin McDaniel, Att'y Gen., by:

ROBIN F. WYNNE

APPEAL FROM THE WASHINGTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. CR-2010-1599-7]

HONORABLE JOANNA TAYLOR, JUDGE

REBRIEFING ORDERED

ROBIN F. WYNNE , Judge

Gilberto Martinez-Marmol appeals from his conviction by a Washington County jury on three counts of rape. He argues on appeal that the circuit court erred in allowing evidence of his confession at trial because the confession was obtained in violation of his constitutional rights. Because appellant's brief does not comply with our briefing rules, we order rebriefing.

Among the deficiencies in appellant's brief is the omission from the abstract of the hearings on appellant's motions in limine pertaining to his confession. The abstract must include all material parts of the transcript. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(5)(A) (2012). In addition, the motions in limine themselves are not included in the addendum. The addendum must include those documents necessary for the appellate court to confirm its jurisdiction, understand the case, and decide the issues on appeal. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(8) (2012). The above-noted deficiencies are to be taken as examples of those we have discovered in the brief and are not to be considered a complete listing of the deficiencies present.

In accordance with Rule 4-2(b)(3) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, appellant's counsel is ordered to file a substituted brief that complies with our rules within fifteen days of the date of this opinion. The State shall have fifteen days thereafter to revise or supplement its brief, unless it elects to rely upon the brief already filed in this appeal. We strongly urge appellant's counsel to review our briefing rules prior to submitting a substituted brief in order to ensure that the substituted brief complies with the rules. We further remind counsel that failure to file a complying brief can result in the judgment of the trial court being summarily affirmed pursuant to Rule 4-2(c)(2) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals.

Rebriefing ordered.

HARRISON and GRUBER, JJ., agree.

Carey E. Lyles Dowdy, for appellant.

Dustin McDaniel, Att'y Gen., by: Christian Harris, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.