Tremain Lacy v. State of Arkansas

ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

No. CR 03-45

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

October 14, 2004

TREMAIN LACY

APPELLANT

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

APPELLEE

Opinion Delivered

PRO SE MOTION TO REINSTATE APPEAL [CIRCUIT COURT OF MILLER COUNTY, CR 2001-450-2, HON. JAMES HUDSON, JR., JUDGE]

MOTION DENIED

PER CURIAM

On January 29, 2004, we affirmed the judgment entered against Tremain Lacy for aggravated robbery for which he was sentenced to serve twenty years' imprisonment. Lacy v. State, 356 Ark. ____, ____ S.W.3d ____ (2004). The mandate was issued following affirmance of the judgment on February 18, 2004.

On June 22, 2004, Lacy filed the instant pro se motion asking that the appeal be reinstated. He states in conclusory fashion that this court discriminated against him as an indigent and as a layman and further denied him due process of law. He also states that he was not provided with a copy of the mandate.

The motion is denied. Any grounds for rehearing should have been raised in a timely petition for rehearing filed by petitioner's attorney before the mandate was issued. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 2-3 (2004).

As to petitioner's complaint that he did not receive a copy of the mandate, the mandate is forwarded directly to the circuit clerk. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 5-3(a) (2004). There is no provision in our procedural rules which requires that a mandate be provided directly to the appellant.

Motion denied.