Springer v. State (Majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 392 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CR-14-983 Opinion Delivered June 17, 2015 RICHARD SPRINGER APPELLANT V. APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH DIVISION [NO. CR-2013-1779] HONORABLE HERBERT WRIGHT, JUDGE STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE SUPPLEMENTAL ABSTRACT AND ADDENDUM ORDERED M. MICHAEL KINARD, Judge Richard Springer appeals from his conviction at a jury trial of sexual indecency with a child, for which he was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment and fined $10,000. He contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict of acquittal and in allowing the State to amend the criminal information. Because appellant’s abstract and addendum are deficient, we must order that he first provide us with a supplemental abstract and addendum before we decide the appeal. Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(5)(A) requires an appellant to abstract all material information found in the transcript. Material information includes objections, arguments, colloquies, and rulings relevant to the issues presented on appeal. Id. Here, although appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, he has failed to abstract his motion for directed verdict made at trial, the prosecutor’s response, and the trial court’s ruling Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 392 on the motion. Rule 4-2(a)(8) requires that an appellant file an addendum that includes true and correct copies of the non-transcript documents in the record that are essential for the appellate court to confirm its jurisdiction, to understand the case, and to decide the issues on appeal. According to the rule, the addendum must include certain items, including juryverdict forms in a case where there was a jury trial. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(8)(A)(i). Here, appellant has failed to include the jury-verdict form in his addendum. Pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(b)(4), appellant’s counsel is directed to file a supplemental abstract and addendum within seven days to correct the omissions. We strongly encourage counsel, prior to filing the supplement, to review our rules as well as the abstract and addendum to ensure that no additional deficiencies are present. Supplemental abstract and addendum ordered. WHITEAKER and HOOFMAN, JJ., agree. John W. Walker, P.A., by: Lawrence Anthony Walker, for appellant. Leslie Rutledge, Att’y Gen., by: Jake H. Jones, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee. 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.
