Moore v. State (Per Curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2014 Ark. 528 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CR-14-989 LACHANDRA MOORE Opinion Delivered December 11, 2014 APPELLANT MOTION FOR RULE ON CLERK V. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE MOTION GRANTED. PER CURIAM Lachandra Moore, by and through her attorney, Shaun Hair, has filed a motion for rule on clerk. On July 16, 2014, the circuit court entered a judgment and commitment order. Moore timely filed a notice of appeal on August 15, 2014. Moore’s counsel tendered the transcript on November 19, 2014. Pursuant to Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure–Criminal 4(b) (2014), Moore’s transcript was due no later than November 14, 2014. In McDonald v. State, 356 Ark. 106, 146 S.W.3d 883 (2004), we said that there are only two possible reasons for an appeal not being timely perfected: either the party or attorney filing the appeal is at fault, or there is good reason. Id. at 116, 146 S.W.3d at 891. Moore’s attorney has candidly admitted fault in the failure to timely file the transcript. When it is plain from the motion, affidavits, and record that relief is proper under either rule based on error or good reason, the relief will be granted, and if there is attorney error, a copy of the opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct. See id. We grant Moore’s motion for rule on clerk as she has shown good cause to proceed. Cite as 2014 Ark. 528 Because the failure to perfect this appeal lies with Moore’s counsel, a copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct. Motion granted. Shaun Hair, for appellant. No response. 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.
