Andrew Tremaine Brewer v. State of Arkansas
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
No.
CR 08-355
Opinion Delivered
ANDREW TREMAINE BREWER
Petitioner
v.
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Respondent
April 24, 2008
PRO SE MOTION FOR BELATED
APPEAL [CIRCUIT COURT OF
COLUMBIA COUNTY, CR 2005-206,
CR 2006-16, HON. LARRY W.
CHANDLER, JUDGE]
MOTION DISMISSED.
PER CURIAM
A jury found petitioner Andrew Tremaine Brewer guilty of possession of a controlled
substance (Darvocet) and residential burglary and sentenced him as a habitual offender to an
aggregate term of 840 months’ imprisonment. The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the
judgment. Brewer v. State, CACR 06-1403 (Ark. App. Sept. 19, 2007). Petitioner filed in this court
a motion to proceed pro se and a pro se petition for review under Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 1-2(b) that was
denied. Brewer v. State, 371 Ark. 532, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Nov. 15, 2007). On December 6, 2007,
petitioner filed in the trial court a pro se petition for postconviction relief under Ark. R. Crim. P.
37.1. The trial court denied the petition in an order entered on December 17, 2007. Petitioner filed
a notice of appeal in the trial court on January 24, 2008.
Petitioner has filed in this court a pro se motion for belated appeal, acknowledging that the
notice of appeal was not filed within the time required under Ark. R. App. P.–Civ. 4(a) and
requesting permission to proceed with an appeal of the denial of his Rule 37.1 petition. We need
not consider the merits of petitioner’s motion, however, because his Rule 37.1 petition was not
timely filed.
A petition under Rule 37.1 must be filed after the mandate is issued because, once a
judgment has been appealed, the trial court does not regain jurisdiction over the case until the
mandate is issued. Butler v. State, 367 Ark. 318, 239 S.W.3d 514 (2006) (per curiam). In this case,
due to a clerical error, the mandate did not issue until March 19, 2008. The trial court did not have
jurisdiction to consider the Rule 37.1 petition, and relief was properly denied on that basis.
Motion dismissed.
-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.
