CALVIN THORNTON V. STATE OF ARKANSAS (Majority)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Cite as 2020 Ark. 6 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CR-17-537 CALVIN THORNTON Opinion Delivered: January 9, 2020 PETITIONER V. STATE OF ARKANSAS PRO SE MOTION REQUESTING PAPER COPY OF TRIAL TRANSCRIPT [PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, SEVENTH DIVISION, NO. 60CR-15RESPONDENT 2832] RESPONSE REQUESTED. ROBIN F. WYNNE, Associate Justice Petitioner Calvin Thornton has filed a pro se motion requesting a paper copy of his trial transcript pursuant to Rule 19(b) of the Arkansas Rules of Appellate Procedure– Criminal (2018). Thornton’s motion, which was filed in this court on July 3, 2019, included a certificate of service to his attorney, Willard Proctor, Jr., at an address in Little Rock and was dated June 6, 2019. In his motion, Thornton alleges that he has written and requested copies of the transcript from Proctor on several occasions to no avail. This court has made clear that under Rule 19(b), the attorney who has been served with a copy of the motion is required to respond. Having been properly served with the motion, Proctor must respond, even if he believes the motion has no merit, as Rule 19 makes counsel’s response mandatory. Green v. State, 2017 Ark. 243, at 1–2 (citing Geatches v. State, 2016 Ark. 452, 505 S.W.3d 691). Accordingly, Proctor is directed to file the response required by Rule 19 stating (1) whether he has the requested copy in his possession; (2) if so, whether the copy is on paper or in some other format; (3) if he has a copy, whether that copy has been provided to Thornton. See Ark. R. App. P.–Crim. 19(b). Response requested. 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.