Robinson v. State (Majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 262 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CACR12-1002 Opinion Delivered April 17, 2013 JASON D. ROBISON APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE RANDOLPH COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. CR-09-154] V. HONORABLE HAROLD S. ERWIN, JUDGE STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE REBRIEFING ORDERED WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge Appellant appeals from the circuit court s revocation of his probation. Because appellant has submitted a brief without a proper abstract, in violation of Arkansas Supreme Court Rules 4-11 and 4-2,2 we order rebriefing. Under Rule 4 1(a), [b]riefs shall be double-spaced, except for quoted material, which may be single-spaced and indented. 3 We note that all of appellant s abstract was single spaced, in addition to other unique, non-paragraph formatting, and therefore did not comply with Rule 4-1(a). 1 (2012). 2 (2012). 3 Wilkins & Associates, Inc. v. Vimy Ridge Mun. Water Imp. Dist., 372 Ark. 117, 118, 270 S.W.3d 869, 871 (2008); Ark. R. Sup. Ct. R. 4-1(a) (2012). Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 262 Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(5)(B) states that [t]he abstract shall be an impartial condensation, without comment or emphasis, of the transcript (stenographically reported material). 4 It goes on to state that [t]he question-and-answer format shall not be used. 5 Appellant includes questions and answers in his abstract on multiple occasions rather than a condensed summary of the same, and therefore did not comply with Rule 4-2(a). We order appellant to submit a substituted abstract correcting the above-referenced deficiencies. We encourage appellant to review Rule 4-1 and Rule 4-2 of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals to ensure that the substituted abstract complies with the rules and that no additional deficiencies are present. After service of the substituted abstract, brief, and addendum, the State shall have an opportunity to revise or supplement its brief in the time prescribed by the clerk, or to rely on the brief that it previously filed in this appeal. Rebriefing ordered. HARRISON and GRUBER, JJ., agree. Devon N. Holder, for appellant. Dustin McDaniel, Att y Gen., by: Pamela A. Rumpz, Ass t Att y Gen., for appellee. 4 Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(5)(B). 5 Id. 2
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.
