The Arkansas Supreme Court did not hand down any decisions this week. The Court of Appeals handed down nineteen signed decisions. I'll comment on three of those decisions; two involve deficient statements of the case and the facts.
Watson v. State, 2025 Ark. App. 52, was remanded to settle and supplement the record. Although appellant's notice of appeal designated the trial transcript as part of the record on appeal, that transcript was not part of the record submitted. Understandably, the appellant cited to pages in the missing record in his argument. Citing Ark. R. App. P.-Civ. 6(e), made applicable to criminal appeals by Ark. R. App. P.-Crim. 4(a), the court noted its authority to direct the correction of a record omitting anything material to either party and, if needed, to order that a supplemental record be certified and transmitted.
Davison v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 2025 Ark. App. 49, is one of the two cases involving a deficient statement. A motion to withdraw and a no-merit brief were filed in this termination of parental rights case. That motion was denied, and the court ordered rebriefing. Citing Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(6), the court observed that "the statement of the case consists of only a brief recitation of the dates of the hearings and orders without any reference to the specific facts of the case." Davison, 2025 Ark. App. 49, at 3. Although appellants appealed from a permanency planning order, "the statement of the case lacks any discussion of what occurred at both the permanency-planning hearing (PPH) and the termination hearing." Id. The brief failed to address all but two adverse rulings, and those two were "only mentioned generically." Id.
Wisely v. Coiner, 2025 Ark. App. 53, involved a different issue with a statement of the case. Again citing Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(6), the court ordered rebriefing in this probate appeal because appellant "has injected arguments and conclusory declarations throughout the statement." Wisely, 2025 Ark. App. 53, at 1. The court quoted a number of statements that it considered conclusory, argumentative, or nonfactual, and concluded: "Because the statement of the case is rife with argument, it violates our rules." Id. at 2. The court expected "a compliant statement of the case and factual information necessary to understand the case and decide the issues on appeal." Id.
No comments:
Post a Comment