The Court of Appeals was busy again this week - I count twenty-two signed opinions handed down - while the Supreme Court handed down three decisions. Some of those Court of Appeals decisions shed light on appellate practice and procedure.
Two Anders-related decisions address the record required for those appeals. In Golden v. State, 2025 Ark. App. 73, although counsel designated the entire record, the voir dire transcript was missing. The court remanded to settle and supplement the record: "In order to determine whether there has been compliance with Anders, we must have the entire record, including a transcript of the jury-selection process." Golden, 2025 Ark. App. 73, at 1-2. "We examine all of the proceedings in a no-merit appeal '[i]nstead of reviewing only the parts of the record that the lawyer puts before us.'" Id. at 2.
Similarly, in Ellis v. State, 2025 Ark. App. 90, the court remanded to settle and supplement the record. Jury selection, opening statements, and closing arguments were omitted from the transcript. The court again stressed the need for the entire record in a no-merit Anders appeal.
In Dean v. State, 2025 Ark. App. 87, Dean moved for a directed verdict, arguing that the state "did not meet it's burden"; he essentially repeated this argument when he rested. Id. at 2, 3. On appeal, Dean challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to find that he was in constructive possession of a firearm. Relying on Ark. R. Crim. P. 33.1(b) and caselaw, the court found that this argument was not preserved for review. "Because Dean's directed-verdict motion failed to specify in what manner the State's proof was insufficient and did not raise the constructive-possession argument he now raises, his sufficiency argument is not preserved for appellate review." Dean, 2025 Ark. App. 90, at 4-5.
Thank you for reading!
No comments:
Post a Comment