{
  "id": 1876627,
  "name": "William R. GROOMS v. STATE of Arkansas",
  "name_abbreviation": "Grooms v. State",
  "decision_date": "1985-10-21",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "220",
  "last_page": "221",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "287 Ark. 220"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "697 S.W.2d 894"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "272 Ark. 243",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1174882
      ],
      "year": 1981,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/272/0243-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "265 Ark. 964",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "year": 1981,
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 101,
    "char_count": 886,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.924,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.06894378784245722
    },
    "sha256": "3448f5bd2fd192918484c5d994111290003ea1baf38eb1584a9929cebce85303",
    "simhash": "1:33104ad1ac5f1e23",
    "word_count": 154
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:17:15.669869+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Purtle, J., not participating."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "William R. GROOMS v. STATE of Arkansas"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nPetitioner, William R. Grooms, by his attorney, Peter R. Darling, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. His attorney admits that the record was tendered late due to his miscalculation of the seven-month maximum limit for filing the record in this Court. See Rule 5, Ark. R. App. P., Ark. Stat. Ann., Vol. 3A (Repl. 1979).\nWe find that such error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See per curiam dated February 5, 1979, 265 Ark. 964; Terry v. State, 272 Ark. 243 (1981).\nA copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.\nPurtle, J., not participating.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Peter R. Darling, for appellant.",
      "Steve Clark, Att\u2019y Gen., by: Theodore Holder, Asst. Att\u2019y Gen., for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William R. GROOMS v. STATE of Arkansas\n697 S.W.2d 894\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered October 21, 1985\nPeter R. Darling, for appellant.\nSteve Clark, Att\u2019y Gen., by: Theodore Holder, Asst. Att\u2019y Gen., for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0220-01",
  "first_page_order": 254,
  "last_page_order": 255
}