Daniel Risher v. State of Arkansas

Annotate this Case
cr03-311

ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

No. CR 03-311

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

DANIEL WAYNE RISHER

Appellant

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

Appellee

Opinion Delivered June 30, 2005

PRO SE MOTION TO HAVE RECORD RETURNED [APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COLUMBIA COUNTY, NO. CR 91-93,HONORABLE LARRY CHANDLER, JUDGE]

MOTION DENIED

PER CURIAM

Appellant was convicted, along with his girlfriend, Nikki Sue Zinger, of the first-degree murder of Zinger's mother, Linda Holley, and sentenced to life imprisonment. We affirmed on direct appeal. Zinger v. State, 313 Ark. 70, 852 S.W.2d 320 (1993). After the judgment was affirmed, appellant filed a petition for postconviction relief pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 37. The petition was denied, and this court affirmed the order. Risher v. State, CR 94-508 (Ark. Dec. 5, 1994) (per curiam). In 1998, appellant filed a petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to consider a petition for writ of error coram nobis. The petition was denied. Risher v. State, CR 92-923 (Ark. April 16, 1998) (per curiam). Appellant filed a petition for rehearing that was also denied. Risher v. State, CR 92-923 (Ark. June 11, 1998) (per curiam). In 2000, appellant filed a second petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to consider a petition for writ of error coram nobis, which was also denied. Risher v. State, CR 92-923 (Ark. Feb. 8, 2001) (per curiam).

Appellant went on to file in the trial court two petitions pursuant to Act 1780 of the 2001 Acts of Arkansas, and various other motions. On August 23, 2002, the trial court denied the petitions and all motions in one order. Appellant filed a notice of appeal, but failed to lodge a timely record. On March 13, 2003, appellant lodged an appeal, and this court affirmed. Risher v. State, CR 03-311 (Ark. Feb. 17, 2005) (per curiam). Appellant now requests that the record lodged in his appeal be returned to him.

The record lodged on appeal remains permanently in the custody of this court. Appellant has shown no good cause to have the record returned to him.

Motion denied.

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.