Kelly Harrison Campbell v. State of Arkansas
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
No.
CR 07-929
Opinion Delivered
KELLY HARRISON CAMPBELL
Appellant
v.
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Appellee
October 4, 2007
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT’S
MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS
COUNSEL; APPELLANT’S PRO SE
MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL AND FOR LEAVE TO
RAISE ISSUE OF HER ENTITLEMENT
TO RELEASE ON APPEAL BOND
[CIRCUIT COURT OF LONOKE
COUNTY, CR 2006-494, HON. JOHN
W. COLE, JUDGE]
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT’S
MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS
COUNSEL DENIED; APPELLANT’S
PRO SE MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND
FOR LEAVE TO RAISE ISSUE OF HER
ENTITLEMENT TO RELEASE ON
BOND MOOT.
PER CURIAM
On April 24, 2007, judgment was entered reflecting that appellant Kelly Harrison Campbell
had been found guilty by a jury of multiple felony offenses for which an aggregate sentence of 240
months’ imprisonment was imposed. On May 1, 2007, appellant timely filed a pro se notice of
appeal from the judgment. On May 10, 2007, she filed an amended pro se notice of appeal that
further delineated the record designated. On July 16, 2007, the trial court entered an order declaring
appellant to be indigent for the purposes of appeal and relieving Mark F. Hampton, the attorney who
had represented appellant at trial, as counsel. As Ark. R. Crim. P. 16(a) provides that the appellate
court has exclusive jurisdiction to relieve an attorney after the notice of appeal is filed, the order was
not a valid order. Barr v. State, 333 Ark. 576, 970 S.W.2d 243 (1998) (per curiam).
Attorney Hampton has lodged in this court a partial record on appeal. Now before us is Mr.
Hampton’s motion to be relieved as counsel and appellant’s pro se motion seeking appointment of
counsel and leave for her appellate attorney to raise the issue of whether she is entitled to release on
bond pending appeal.1 Mr. Hampton’s basis for his request to be relieved is that a new attorney
could give new, objective analysis to the issues on appeal and further protect appellant’s rights and
interests.
Because Mr. Hampton represented appellant at trial, he is in a unique position to assess the
merits of an appeal of the judgments entered against her. Moreover, he has not offered any fact or
circumstance that warrants appointing other counsel. For this reason, Mr. Hampton is appointed to
represent appellant on appeal. As noted, only a partial record has been lodged. While the notice and
amended notice of appeal indicate that the entire record was ordered, it is not clear whether a proper
request for an extension of time to lodge the record has been filed. Counsel is directed to file within
fifteen days from the date of this opinion a petition for writ of certiorari to bring up the record, in the
event that proper procedure has not been followed in order to do so.
Inasmuch as Mr. Hampton will remain attorney-of-record for the appeal, appellant’s pro se
motion for appointment of counsel is moot. Her request for permission for counsel to raise the issue
of whether is she entitled to release on appeal bond is also moot because there is no need for an
1
Appellant was released on bond after her conviction. Upon further review, the trial court
declared in its July 16, 2007, order that she was not entitled to release on bond pending appeal.
Appellant is currently in the custody of the Arkansas Department of Correction.
-2-
appellant to seek leave of this court before filing a motion in the appellate court on the issue of
whether the appellant is entitled to bond.
Attorney for appellant’s motion to be relieved as counsel denied; appellant’s pro se motion
for appointment of counsel and for leave to raise issue of her entitlement to release on bond moot.
-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.
