Boykins v. Williams (Per Curiam)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Cite as 2013 Ark. 63 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CR 13-31 Opinion Delivered DEWAYNE BOYKINS PETITIONER v. HON. CHRIS E WILLIAMS, CIRCUIT JUDGE RESPONDENT February 14, 2013 PRO SE MOTION FOR RULE ON CLERK TO FILE PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS WITHOUT CERTIFIED RECORD [HOT SPRING COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, DOCKET NUMBER UNKNOWN] MOTION DENIED. PER CURIAM Petitioner Dewayne Boykins tendered to this court a pro se petition for writ of mandamus, alleging that the respondent circuit judge had not acted in a timely manner on a pro se motion for extension of time to lodge a record on appeal and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Now before us is petitioner s motion for rule on clerk seeking to file the mandamus petition without the certified record required to file such an action. Rule 6-1(a) of this court provides that in cases in which the jurisdiction of this court is in fact appellate, although in form original, such as petitions for writs of prohibition, certiorari, or mandamus, the pleadings with certified exhibits from the trial court are treated as the record. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 6-1(a) (2012); Wright v. Griffen, 2012 Ark. 313 (per curiam); Barnett v. Tabor, 2010 Ark. 22 (per curiam); Davis v. Dennis, 2009 Ark. 474 (per curiam); Dillard v. Keith, 336 Ark. 521, 986 S.W.2d 100 (1999) (per curiam). This court cannot assume jurisdiction of the mandamus petition tendered by petitioner without a certified record. See Wright, 2012 Ark. 313. Accordingly, the motion is denied. Motion denied.

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.