Edward Lockhart v. State of Arkansas

ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

No. 04-1337

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

EDWARD LOCKHART

Appellant

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

Appellee

Opinion Delivered November 10, 2005

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, CV 2004-352-1, HON. BERLIN C. JONES, JUDGE

AFFIRMED

PER CURIAM

Edward Lockhart is incarcerated in the Arkansas Department of Correction serving a sentence of 120 months' imprisonment, having entered guilty pleas on each of two convictions for DWI, fifth offense, in Pulaski County Circuit Court. Lockhart filed a petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus in Jefferson County Circuit Court, where he is incarcerated. The trial court denied the petition, and this appeal followed.

Appellant Lockhart raises three points on appeal: (1) that the circuit court erred in finding the petition did not demonstrate that the commitment was invalid or the trial court lacked jurisdiction to impose sentence pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 16-90-803 - 16-90-804 (Supp. 2001); (2) that the circuit court erred in finding the petition did not demonstrate that the commitment was invalid or that the trial court lacked jurisdiction when petitioner was charged under the Omnibus DWI Act; (3) that the circuit court erred by using prior felony convictions pursuant to what he has cited as Ark. Stat. Ann. § 41-1005 (Supp. 1983), possibly intending to reference Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-502 (Repl. 1997), as the State suggests. In any event, all three arguments hinge upon appellant's assertion that he was charged under the Omnibus DWI Act, which he alleges controlled his sentencing.

We cannot reach the merits of appellant's arguments because he has failed to bring to this court a record sufficient for us to do so. Appellant has not included the charging document or documents in his addendum. While appellant has not provided a brief that conforms with Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2, we do not provide appellant an opportunity to submit a complying brief because the record is also deficient. There is also no indictment or information in the record. It is the responsibility of the appellant to bring a record to this court sufficient for our review of the issues presented. Jones v. Flowers, ___Ark.___, ___S.W.3d___(November 18, 2004). These documents are essential to an understanding of appellant's arguments. While our rules do not specifically fix the contents of a criminal record, Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 3-4(a) clearly contemplates inclusion of the charging document in any criminal record presented to us. Because appellant's arguments all center on whether or not he was properly sentenced for the charges against him, it is not possible to address the merits of any of his arguments without those documents. We must therefore affirm on all points.

Affirmed.