Not Designated for Publication
MAY 30, 2007
LILLIE FAYE JACKSON and JONATHAN
STATE OF ARKANSAS
APPEAL FROM T HE CRITTENDEN
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
HONORABLE RALPH EDWIN WILSON,
Appellant Lillie Jackson was convicted by a Crittenden County jury of first-degree battery
and permitting the abuse of a minor. The sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court abused its
discretion by allowing statements made by the minor to two DHS employees into evidence under
Rule 803(24) of the Arkansas Rules of Evidence.
The submitted abstract provides only the
challenged testimony without the related objections to the trial testimony, yet the record contains
appellant’s repeated objections interrupting the testimony. The abstract is the record on appeal, see
Greene v. Pack, 343 Ark. 97, 32 S.W.3d 482 (2000). Therefore, we cannot fully address the
argument on appeal until the abstract and brief are supplemented to include those objections. Rule
4-2 (b) sets forth appropriate options when the appellant’s abstract or addendum is insufficient. Rule
4-2(b)(3) states that the Court will afford appellant an opportunity to cure any deficiencies even if
the appellee does not call attention to the deficiency. Accordingly, appellant has fifteen days within
which to file a substituted abstract, Addendum, and brief, to conform to Rule 4-2.
G LOVER and M ARSHALL, JJ., agree.