Linda Street v. State of Arkansas

Annotate this Case
                Linda STREET v. STATE of Arkansas

CR TEN-97-1                                        ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
               Opinion delivered December 18, 1997


Appeal & error -- motion to dismiss -- good cause for
     granting. -- Appellant's failure to perfect the appeal in a
     timely manner was good cause to grant appellee's motion to
     dismiss.

     Motion to Dismiss; granted.
     No response.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  David R. Raupp, Sr. Asst.
Att'y Gen., for appellee.

     Per Curiam.
     Appellee the State of Arkansas, by and through counsel,
Winston Bryant, Attorney General, and David R. Raupp, Senior
Assistant Attorney General, has filed a motion to dismiss
Appellant's appeal.
     On August 30, 1996, Appellant Linda Street conditionally
pleaded guilty to two counts of possession of a controlled
substance with intent to deliver and one count of possession of
drug paraphernalia.  Appellant filed a notice of appeal the same
date.  Appellant was granted a thirty-day extension to lodge her
transcript, but she failed to lodge it by its due date on
December 28, 1996.  
     By letter dated January 3, 1997, the clerk of this court
advised Appellant's attorney that a motion for rule on the clerk
would be necessary to get the record filed and to proceed with the
appeal.  Appellant's attorney has taken no action in the appeal
since tendering the transcript late on January 2, 1997.  
      We find that Appellant's failure to perfect this appeal in a
timely manner is good cause to grant appellee's motion to dismiss
the appeal. 
     The motion is, therefore, granted. 
     A. Wayne Davis, attorney for Appellant, is also ordered to
appear before this court on the 15th day of January, 1998, at
9:00 a.m. to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of
this court for his failure to perfect Appellant Street's appeal in
a timely manner. 


Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.