Mancia v. State
| Decision Date | 06 February 2014 |
| Docket Number | No. CR-11-556,CR-11-556 |
| Parties | CRISTOBAL ANTONIO MANCIA APPELLANT v. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
HONORABLE ROBIN F. GREEN,
REBRIEFING ORDERED.
On March 7, 2008, appellant, Cristobal Antonio Mancia, pleaded guilty to rape and was sentenced to a term of life imprisonment. Pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(k) (2010), Mancia filed a brief on appeal asserting that there was no meritorious basis for his appeal. We agreed and affirmed Mancia's conviction. Mancia v. State, 2010 Ark. 247 (per curiam).
On July 19, 2010, pursuant to Rule 37.1 of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure (2010), Mancia filed a petition for postconviction relief alleging eight grounds for relief. On February 7, 2011, without holding a hearing, the circuit court denied Mancia's petition. From that order, Mancia appeals and contends that the circuit court erred by entering findings on four of his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims without holding a hearing: (1) Mancia's counsel was intoxicated at the plea hearing; (2) Mancia's counsel failed to investigate the victim's statement based on the fact that the victim did not speak English and the police didnot speak Spanish; (3) Mancia's counsel failed to investigate Mancia's statement to the police based on Mancia's limited ability to communicate in English and did not have an interpreter at court proceedings; and (4) Mancia's counsel did not inform Mancia of the sentencing options and did not secure a plea agreement with a set number of years of imprisonment.
We do not reach the merits of Mancia's arguments, however, because we must order rebriefing to correct abstracting deficiencies. Pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(5) (2011),
Here, Mancia did not provide any abstract, stating that "[Mancia] entered a guilty plea in this matter and therefore there is no transcript of a trial to be abstracted." However, a review of the record demonstrates that Mancia's guilty-plea hearing is pertinent to this court's review of his Rule 37 appeal. Therefore, we remand Mancia's appeal...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mancia v. State
...because of abstract deficiencies in the brief that had been filed by Reece, we ordered rebriefing in this appeal. Mancia v. State, 2014 Ark. 55, 2014 WL 495130 (per curiam). On February 6, 2014, we notified Mancia, at the Arkansas Department of Correction, of our per curiam, and provided hi......
-
Mancia v. State, CR-11-556
...6, 2014, we ordered rebriefing in CR-11-556 because of abstract deficiencies in the brief that had been filed by Reece. Mancia v. State, 2014 Ark. 55 (per curiam). Specifically, we noted that "Mancia's guilty-plea hearing is pertinent to the court's review of his Rule 37 appeal" and should ......