Nickels v. State (Per Curiam)
Annotate this CaseIn two separate proceedings, Appellant was convicted of a number of drug-related charges. No appeal was taken from the judgments. Appellant later filed a petition in the trial court challenging the two judgments and filed a motion seeking to receive certain documents in the proceedings. The petition was couched in terms of extraordinary relief, but Appellant sought postconviction relief from his convictions. The trial court denied the motion and petition on the basis that Appellant should pursue his remedy in the Supreme Court. Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court and filed two motions in relation to the appeal. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and declared the motions moot, holding that the petition Appellant filed was not a petition on which the trial court could grant relief under Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.
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.