Smith v. Hobbs (Per Curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2014 Ark. 337 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CV-14-122 Opinion Delivered July 31, 2014 JIMMY SMITH APPELLANT V. RAY HOBBS, DIRECTOR, ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION APPELLEE APPELLEE S MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL [LINCOLN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NO. 40CV-13-109] HONORABLE JODI RAINES DENNIS, JUDGE MOTION GRANTED. PER CURIAM On February 7, 2014, appellant Jimmy Smith lodged an appeal in this court from a circuit court order that had dismissed his pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. The appellee State now asks that the appeal be dismissed for appellant s failure to submit a brief. Appellant was informed that his brief-in-chief was due here no later than March 19, 2014. As of the date of this opinion, he has not tendered a brief or filed a motion to file a belated brief. He has taken no action to pursue the appeal. Failure of an appellant who is acting pro se to file a brief in an appeal is cause for dismissal of the appeal. Ball v. State, 2014 Ark. 152 (per curiam); Farnsworth v. State, 2013 Ark. 484 (per curiam); Butler v. Hobbs, 2012 Ark. 162 (per curiam); Barker v. Hobbs, 2011 Ark. 420 (per curiam); Ingold v. State, 2009 Ark. 611 (per curiam); Vickers v. State, 2009 Ark. 585 (per curiam); Pineda v. State, 2009 Ark. 554 (per curiam). Motion granted.
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.
