Lee v. State
| Decision Date | 15 December 2016 |
| Docket Number | No. CR-14-923,CR-14-923 |
| Citation | Lee v. State, 2016 Ark. 464, No. CR-14-923 (Ark. Dec 15, 2016) |
| Parties | TERRY ANTONIO LEE APPELLANT v. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
PRO SE MOTION FOR REVERSAL AND DISMISSAL
[PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NO. 60CR-10-48]
Appellant, Terry Antonio Lee, is incarcerated pursuant to convictions for committing a terrorist act, attempting to commit first-degree battery, and four counts of aggravated assault. Lee's convictions and sentence of an aggregate term of 1020 months' imprisonment were affirmed by the Arkansas Court of Appeals. Lee v. State, 2013 Ark. App. 209. The mandate issued on April 16, 2013. Thereafter, Lee filed in the trial court a timely pro se petition under Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 37.1 (2013). After conducting two hearings on Lee's postconviction petition, the trial court denied relief, and Lee appealed to this court. On July 21, 2016, this court remanded the matter for the purpose of settling the record and for additional findings of fact addressing Lee's allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel based on trial counsel's failure to make sufficient directed-verdict motions. Lee v. State, 2016 Ark. 293, at 7, 498 S.W.3d 283, 287 (per curiam). The supplemental record and order were to be filed in this court within sixty days of the date of the per curiam opinion. Id. The trial court filed a supplemental Rule 37 order on September 8, 2016, and the supplemental record that included transcripts of two postconviction hearings was lodged in this court on September 12, 2016. Lee's supplemental brief was due in this court on October 24, 2016. Instead of filing a supplemental brief, Lee filed a pro se motion for reversal and dismissal on October 13, 2016, alleging that the trial court disobeyed this court by failing to file supplemental findings of fact in compliance with this court's opinion.
As stated above, the trial court complied with this court's opinion and filed a supplemental order that set forth additional findings of fact. Id. Lee has therefore failed to state grounds for either reversing the trial court or dismissing this appeal. However, it is clear from the allegations contained in the motion that Lee has not been provided with a copy of the supplemental Rule 37 order. Rule 37.3(d) (2016) of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure contains a requirement that the trial court promptly mail a copy of an order entered on a Rule 37.1 petition to the petitioner. See Horton v. State, 2016 Ark. 193, at 2 (per...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Lee v. State
...entered on remand, we entered another order remanding for compliance with Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 37.3(d) (2016). Lee v. State, 2016 Ark. 464, 2016 Ark. 464 (per curiam).3 The jury was instructed that the offense of committing a terrorist act occurred if the State proved that Le......