Badger v. Unkown Cir. Judge
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2009 Ark. 513
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No.
CR 09-493
Opinion Delivered
October 22, 2009
v.
PRO SE MOTION FOR RULE ON
CLERK TO FILE PETITION FOR
WRIT OF MANDAMUS WITHOUT
NAMING RESPONDENT [CIRCUIT
COURT OF DREW COUNTY, BW 200836]
UNKNOWN CIRCUIT JUDGE
Respondent
MOTION DENIED.
CRAYTONIA BADGER
Petitioner
PER CURIAM
In 2008, a bench warrant was issued in the Circuit Court of Drew County for the arrest of petitioner
Craytonia Badger on charges of commercial burglary and theft of property over $2,500.00.
Petitioner is currently incarcerated in the Louisiana Department of Corrections, and the bench
warrant does not indicate that it has been executed and served on petitioner. Although no felony
information has been filed by the prosecutor, petitioner filed in circuit court a number of pleadings
in the matter.1
Petitioner tendered a pro se petition for writ of mandamus to this court asking that we direct the
Drew County circuit court judges, in general, to act on the pleadings. The petition for writ of
mandamus was not filed by our clerk’s office because petitioner failed to name a specific judge as the
1
In the Circuit Court of Drew County, petitioner filed a motion to quash the bench warrant, motion
for production of documents, motion for bill of particulars, discovery, inspection and production, motion to
reduce bond and/or release petitioner on his personal recognizance, petition for writ of mandamus, and
motion for dismissal of the charges for lack of evidence. Only the motion for bill of particulars contains a
certificate of service, and that particular certificate indicates that a copy of the motion was served on “Circuit
Court Attorney Office/Monticello Police Department.” The record tendered by petitioner does not reflect
that a response has been filed to any of the pleadings.
Cite as 2009 Ark. 513
respondent.
Now before us is petitioner’s pro se motion for rule on clerk in which he seeks leave to file the
mandamus petition without identifying the respondent and without serving a copy of the petition
on any person. Petitioner contends that he made a request by telephone “to the circuit court” that
the matter be assigned to a judge, but that the request was denied because petitioner has not been
yet been extradited to this state on the charges.
The motion for rule on clerk is denied. Pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 6-1(a)(2), an
extraordinary writ commenced in this court must show proof that the petition was served on “the
adverse party or his or her counsel of record in the circuit court.” There is no means to proceed
otherwise under the rule, and petitioner has not cited any grounds for doing so.
Motion denied.
-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.
