{
  "id": 1111370,
  "name": "Gyronne BUCKLEY v. STATE of Arkansas",
  "name_abbreviation": "Buckley v. State",
  "decision_date": "2001-09-06",
  "docket_number": "CR 01-644",
  "first_page": "2",
  "last_page": "3",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "346 Ark. 2"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "53 S.W.3d 518"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "345 Ark. 570",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        938995
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2001,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "per curiam"
        },
        {
          "parenthetical": "per curiam"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/345/0570-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "386 U.S. 738",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        6182629
      ],
      "year": 1967,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/386/0738-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 134,
    "char_count": 1449,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.764,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.04042359226348718
    },
    "sha256": "e43c763ce77049e8c84487c3d9d218e6ab78362a9e581c797af07e511e27154e",
    "simhash": "1:4f89c0e609ac3bb3",
    "word_count": 241
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:24:55.385284+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "ARNOLD, C.J., not participating."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "Gyronne BUCKLEY v. STATE of Arkansas"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nAppellant, Gyronne Buckley, by and through his attorney, Jack T. Lassiter, filed a motion to reset the briefing schedule in this case.\nOn June 7, 2001, appellant\u2019s counsel filed a motion to withdraw as attorney of record and lodged a partial record. Flowever, appellant did not file a brief, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and our Rule 4 \u2014 3(j)(1), stating there was no merit to the appeal. In Buckley v. State, 345 Ark. 570, 48 S.W.3d 534 (2001) (per curiam), we ordered appellant\u2019s counsel to \u201ceither file a motion to withdraw with an accompanying brief, pursuant to Rule 4 \u2014 30)(1), or rebrief the issues in this appeal and argue the merits.\u201d Counsel had thirty days from the decision to file the appropriate documents.\nAppellant\u2019s counsel now requests additional briefing time because the court reporter paid a deposit on the transcript prior to our per curiam order, and she obtained an extension from the trial court to August 26, 2001. Specifically, counsel requests that we extend the briefing schedule to a date subsequent to August 26, 2001, the completion and fifing of the transcript.\nWe grant appellant\u2019s motion. An appropriate briefing schedule will be set the clerk of this court.\nMotion granted.\nARNOLD, C.J., not participating.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Jack X Lassiter, for appellant.",
      "No response."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Gyronne BUCKLEY v. STATE of Arkansas\nCR 01-644\n53 S.W.3d 518\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered September 6, 2001\nJack X Lassiter, for appellant.\nNo response."
  },
  "file_name": "0002-01",
  "first_page_order": 26,
  "last_page_order": 27
}