Paul Barron, Sr. v. State of Arkansas
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
No.
CR 06-506
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
Opinion Delivered
June 1, 2006
PAUL BARRON, SR.
Petitioner
PRO SE MOTIONS FOR RULE ON
CLERK AND TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS [CIRCUIT COURT OF
CARROLL COUNTY, CR 2000-124,
HON. ALAN DAVID EPLEY, JUDGE]
v.
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Respondent
MOTION FOR RULE ON CLERK
GRANTED; MOTION TO PROCEED IN
FORMA PAUPERIS DENIED
PER CURIAM
A jury found petitioner Paul Barron, Sr., guilty of manufacturing a controlled substance,
methamphetamine, and sentenced him to 180 months’ imprisonment in the Arkansas Department
of Correction. The judgment and commitment order was entered on January 8, 2002, and
petitioner’s retained counsel, Phillip A. Moon, timely filed a notice of appeal on January 18, 2002,
indicating that the transcript had been ordered. Petitioner, now proceeding pro se, brings this motion
requesting this court to compel counsel to perfect the appeal.1
Rule 16 of the Arkansas Rules of Appellate Procedure–Criminal provides that trial counsel,
1
Because the notice of appeal was timely filed, the present motion involves the docketing
of the record, and the relief sought is under Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 2-2. The motion is not therefore
subject to dismissal as untimely for failure to comply with the eighteen-month time limit under
Ark. R. App. P.--Crim. 2, as would be a motion for belated appeal that involves the notice of
appeal. See McGahey v. State, 359 Ark. 252, ___ S.W.3d ___ (2004); McDonald v. State, 356
Ark. 106, 146 S.W.3d 883 (2004).
whether retained or court-appointed, shall continue to represent a convicted defendant throughout
any appeal unless permitted by the trial court or the appellate court to withdraw in the interest of
justice or for other sufficient cause. See Hammon v. State, 347 Ark. 267, 65 S.W.3d 853 (2002).
The partial record before us does not indicate Mr. Moon was permitted to withdraw as counsel, nor
is there any order dismissing the appeal or otherwise relieving Mr. Moon of his obligation to perfect
an appeal.
Once the notice of appeal was filed, Mr. Moon was obligated to perfect the appeal. Gooden
v. State, 344 Ark. 291, 40 S.W.3d 271 (2001) (per curiam); Johnson v. State, 342 Ark. 709, 30
S.W.3d 715 (2000) (per curiam). Because there is no order dismissing the appeal or otherwise
relieving Mr. Moon from his obligation to perfect the appeal, Mr. Moon was obligated to lodge the
record in the appellate court and continue in his representation of petitioner. See Rogers v. State, 353
Ark. 359, 107 S.W.3d 166 (2003) (per curiam). It is well settled that under no circumstances may
an attorney who has not been relieved by the court abandon an appeal. Id. at 361, 107 S.W.3d at
167. The fact that Mr. Moon did not perfect the appeal clearly indicates that he has failed in his duty
to petitioner. See id.; Gooden, 344 Ark. at 292, 40 S.W.3d at 272.
As Mr. Moon remains responsible for representing petitioner on appeal, our clerk is directed
to lodge the partial record. Mr. Moon is directed to file a petition for writ of certiorari within thirty
days to call up the entire record, or that portion of it necessary for an appeal to this court. A copy
of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.
We note that petitioner has made a request to this court to proceed in forma pauperis on
appeal. We deny the motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Mr. Moon represented appellant as
private counsel, and appellant had been released on a $50,000 bond prior to his incarceration. The
-2-
notice of appeal indicated the record had been ordered.
Motion for rule on clerk granted; motion to proceed in forma pauperis denied.
-3-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
