John Briley v. State of Arkansas

Annotate this Case
ar02-324

ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

No. CACR 02-324

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

JOHN BRILEY

Petitioner

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

Respondent

Opinion Delivered May 12, 2005

PRO SE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF PETITION TO REINVEST JURISDICTION IN THE TRIAL COURT TO CONSIDER A PETITION FOR WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS [CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, CR 99-3175]

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED

PER CURIAM

John Briley was found guilty by a jury of possession of a controlled substance and sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment. The court of appeals affirmed. Briley v. State, CA CR 02-324 (Ark. App. Feb. 12, 2003). Briley subsequently filed a petition for postconviction relief pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1 in the trial court, which was denied. Briley did not file a timely notice of appeal and sought leave from this court to proceed with a belated appeal. The motion was denied. Briley v. State, CR 04-239 (Ark. Apr. 8, 2004) (per curiam). Briley then petitioned this court to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to consider a petition for writ of error coram nobis,1 which was denied. Briley v. State, CA CR 02-324 (Ark. Mar. 10, 2004) (per curiam). He now asks that we reconsider the petition.

We need not reiterate the grounds on which the petition was denied which are set out in our opinion. It will suffice to say that Briley's arguments do not establish that there is some error of fact or law contained in the decision. Accordingly, there is no cause to revisit the petition.

Motion for reconsideration denied.

1 For clerical purposes, the petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to consider a petition for writ of error coram nobis was assigned the same docket number as the direct appeal of the judgment.