{
  "id": 939052,
  "name": "Timothy HOUFF v. STATE of Arkansas",
  "name_abbreviation": "Houff v. State",
  "decision_date": "2001-06-14",
  "docket_number": "CR 01-595",
  "first_page": "287",
  "last_page": "289",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "345 Ark. 287"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "45 S.W.3d 386"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "265 Ark. 964",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "year": 1979,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "per curiam"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "288 Ark. 172",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8718311
      ],
      "weight": 4,
      "year": 1986,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "per curiam"
        },
        {
          "parenthetical": "per curiam"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/288/0172-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "341 Ark. 649",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1257742
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2000,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "per curiam"
        },
        {
          "parenthetical": "per curiam"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/341/0649-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 198,
    "char_count": 2483,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.749,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.505882454708161e-08,
      "percentile": 0.519711573918016
    },
    "sha256": "753d1bd800d198b62751cf864cc1c15e7c87832a7014c60907bbc1768b11499f",
    "simhash": "1:604ee2b6081fba22",
    "word_count": 436
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:03:17.216423+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Timothy HOUFF v. STATE of Arkansas"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nAppellant Timothy Houff, by and through his attorney, Kelly J. Adkins, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. The record reflects that Appellant was convicted of two counts of residential burglary, one count of breaking and entering, and one count of theft of property after a bench trial that was held on September 11, 2000. On October 2, 2000, Appellant was orally sentenced to serve a total of forty-two months in the Arkansas Department of Correction. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on October 3, 2000. The judgment and commitment order, however, was not filed until October 18, 2000. Pursuant to Ark. R. App. RCrim. 2(b)(1), the notice of appeal is treated as timely filed on October 19, 2000.\nOn November 29, 2000, the trial court entered an order extending the time to file the record on appeal until May 17, 2001. The record was not tendered with this court\u2019s clerk until May 21, 2001. Appellant\u2019s counsel admits that the record was not timely filed; however, she does not accept responsibility for tendering the record late. Instead, she states only that the record was not ready until the afternoon of May 16, and that she was out of town on May 17.\nThis court will grant a motion for rule on the clerk in criminal cases when the attorney admits that the record was not timely filed due to an error on his or her part. Beavers v. State, 341 Ark. 649, 19 S.W.3d 23 (2000) (per curiam) (citing Tarry v. State, 288 Ark. 172, 702 S.W.2d 804 (1986) (per curiam)). A statement that it was someone else\u2019s fault or no one\u2019s fault will not suffice. Id. The attorney is responsible for filing the record and cannot shift that responsibility to the trial judge, the court reporter, the clerk of the lower court, or anyone else. Id. Because Ms. Adkins fails to accept responsibility for not filing the record within the required time, Appellant\u2019s motion must be denied.\nAppellant\u2019s attorney shall file within thirty days from the date of this per curiam order a motion and affidavit in this case accepting full responsibility for not timely filing the notice of appeal. Upon filing same, the motion for rule on the clerk will be granted, and a copy of the opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct. See In Re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964 (1979) (per curiam).",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Kelly J. Adkins, for appellant.",
      "No response."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Timothy HOUFF v. STATE of Arkansas\nCR 01-595\n45 S.W.3d 386\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered June 14, 2001\nKelly J. Adkins, for appellant.\nNo response."
  },
  "file_name": "0287-01",
  "first_page_order": 309,
  "last_page_order": 311
}