Jeffrey L. Boen v. State of Arkansas
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No. CR08-588
JEFFREY L. BOEN,
Opinion Delivered June 19, 2008
APPELLANT,
MOTION FOR RULE ON CLERK.
VS.
STATE OF ARKANSAS,
APPELLEE,
MOTION FOR RULE ON CLERK
GRANTED; HODGES’ MOTION TO
BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL
GRANTED; BURNETT’S MOTION
TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL
DENIED.
PER CURIAM
Appellant Jeffrey L. Boen was convicted of theft of property, a class B felony, and
criminal mischief, a class A misdemeanor, in the Johnson County Circuit Court. The
judgment was filed for record on July 9, 2007. Boen’s notice of appeal was filed on August
29, 2007, by new counsel, John Cameron Burnett. Trial counsel, Kenneth A. Hodges,
tendered the record on May 16, 2008, which our clerk correctly declined to file.
Hodges moves this court to direct our clerk to file the record, arguing unavoidable
casualty. Hodges states that he informed Boen of both the need to file a notice of appeal
within thirty days of the date of judgment and of the cost of the appeal. According to
Hodges, Boen then elected to get another attorney. The notice of appeal was filed by
Burnett.
In his motion for rule on clerk, Hodges argues that the judgment was filed of record
on July 31, 2007. The notice of appeal supplied to this court says that “Jeffery L. Boen ...
appealed the Decree of the Circuit Court entered on July 19, 2007.” The judgment
furnished as an exhibit to this court is dated July 19, 2007, but is file marked July 31, 2007,
which is timely. The motion for rule on clerk is granted.
Both Hodges and Burnett move the court to be relieved as counsel. By filing the
notice of appeal, Burnett subjected himself to the court’s jurisdiction and to the requirement
of Rule 16. Ark. R. App. P. – Crim. 16(a). Although he was apparently relieved by an order
included in the record, the trial court had no authority to relieve counsel after the notice of
appeal was filed because exclusive jurisdiction to relieve rests with the appellate court. After
he entered his appearance, Burnett effectively abandoned the appeal. It is well settled that
under no circumstances may an attorney who has not been relieved by this court abandon an
appeal. Rogers v. State, 353 Ark. 359, 107 S.W.3d 166 (2003). Because Burnett took the
initiative to file the notice of appeal, he has the responsibility to pursue the appeal and his
motion to be relieved as counsel is denied. Because we find Burnett committed attorney
error, we refer him to the Committee on Professional Conduct.
Burnett’s motion to be relieved as counsel denied; Hodges’s motion to be relieved as
counsel is granted; Motion for rule on clerk is granted.
.
-2-
-3-
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.