{
  "id": 5400484,
  "name": "Jose Luis VALENZUELA v. STATE of Arkansas",
  "name_abbreviation": "Valenzuela v. State",
  "decision_date": "2004-04-22",
  "docket_number": "CA CR 03-373",
  "first_page": "89",
  "last_page": "90",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "357 Ark. 89"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "160 S.W.3d 345"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "356 Ark. 122",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        5368926
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2004,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "per curiam"
        },
        {
          "parenthetical": "per curiam"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/356/0122-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 176,
    "char_count": 1848,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.761,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.1589866822351419
    },
    "sha256": "a3981102d33b511a99a6371597beb5090b34bdd3485722e9feb15b9b2bde4479",
    "simhash": "1:3aaa49864edb4938",
    "word_count": 316
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:35:50.829950+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Jose Luis VALENZUELA v. STATE of Arkansas"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe State has filed a motion to dismiss Jose riam. appeal, claiming that certain jurisdictional grounds have not yet been addressed in this case. A brief chronology-reveals that Valenzuela filed his notice of appeal from the conviction in this case one day late, and the trial court dismissed the appeal. Then, within thirty days, Valenzuela filed a notice of appeal from the dismissal order. Both notices were filed on Valenzuela\u2019s behalf by Charles Waldman, an attorney who is not licensed to practice law in the State of Arkansas. The State contends that, for this reason, both notices of appeal were wholly ineffective, and therefore, an appellate court has no jurisdiction over an appeal in this case.\nIn addition, disciplinary proceedings are pending against Charles Waldman in another case before this court. Mr. Waldman appeared on January 15, 2004, to show cause why he should not be held in civil contempt. At that time, he denied that contempt sanctions were appropriate, and a special master, Judge John Cole, was appointed to conduct a hearing on the matter. See McKenzie v. State, 356 Ark. 122, 146 S.W.3d 892 (2004) (per curiam). A hearing before Judge Cole on the contempt charge is scheduled for May 24, 2004.\nAt the time the State filed its motion to dismiss, appellant\u2019s time to file a belated appeal under Ark. R. App. P. \u2014 Crim. 2(e) (2003), had not expired. In light of the appellant\u2019s right to an appeal under Ark. R. App. P. \u2014 Crim. 1, we hold that the time for filing the State\u2019s brief, originally due on February 9, 2004, should be extended until June 30, 2004.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Charles E. Waldman, for appellant.",
      "Mike Beebe, Att\u2019y Gen., by: Misty Wilson Borkowski, Ass\u2019t Att\u2019y Gen., for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Jose Luis VALENZUELA v. STATE of Arkansas\nCA CR 03-373\n160 S.W.3d 345\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered April 22, 2004\nCharles E. Waldman, for appellant.\nMike Beebe, Att\u2019y Gen., by: Misty Wilson Borkowski, Ass\u2019t Att\u2019y Gen., for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0089-01",
  "first_page_order": 111,
  "last_page_order": 112
}