David Earl Martin v. Larry Norris, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT  No.  07­943  Opinion Delivered  DAVID EARL MARTIN  Appellant  v.  LARRY NORRIS, DIRECTOR,  ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF  CORRECTION  Appellee  January 10, 2008  PRO SE MOTION FOR EXTENSION  OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF [CIRCUIT  COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, CV  2007­6, HON. HAROLD S. ERWIN,  JUDGE]  APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION  MOOT.  PER CURIAM  On January 5, 2007, while incarcerated in Jackson County, appellant David Earl Martin filed  in the circuit court in that county a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus, claiming that he had been  sentenced illegally.  The circuit court dismissed the petition, and appellant has lodged an appeal from  that order in this court.  1  Appellant  now  seeks  an  extension  of  time  to  file  his  brief.  As  appellant  could  not  be  successful on appeal, the appeal is dismissed and the motion is moot.  An appeal from an order that  denied a petition for postconviction relief will not be permitted to go forward where it is clear that  the appellant could not prevail.  Pardue v. State, 338 Ark. 606, 999 S.W.2d 198 (1999) (per curiam);  Seaton v. State, 324 Ark. 236, 920 S.W.2d 13 (1996) (per curiam).  It is clear from the record that appellant was in custody in Jackson County when he filed the  petition for writ of habeas corpus, but has since been transferred to the Cummins Unit in Lincoln 1  After appellant filed the motion, he timely filed the brief.  As there is clearly no merit to  the appeal, we nevertheless decline to permit the appeal to go forward.  County.  We dismiss the appeal because the Circuit Court of Jackson County can no longer grant the  relief sought by appellant.  Any petition for writ of habeas corpus to effect the release of a prisoner is properly addressed  to the circuit court in the county in which the prisoner is held in custody, unless the petition is filed  2  pursuant to Act 1780 of 2001.  Lukach v. State, 369 Ark. 475, ___ S.W.3d ___ (2007) (per curiam).  As a corollary to that limitation, a circuit court does not have jurisdiction to release a prisoner not  in custody in that court’s jurisdiction on a writ of habeas corpus.  Pardue, supra, citing Mackey v.  Lockhart, 307 Ark. 321, 819 S.W.2d 702 (1991).  Here, appellant did not invoke Act 1780, and  Jackson County Circuit Court does not have personal jurisdiction to release appellant who is held in  another county.  Lukach, supra.  Appeal dismissed; motion moot. 2  Act 1780 of 2001, as amended by Act 2250 of 2005 and codified as Ark. Code Ann. §§  16­112­201–16­112­208 (Repl. 2006), provides that a writ of habeas corpus can issue based upon  new scientific evidence proving a person actually innocent of the offense or offenses for which he  or she was convicted.  ­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.