Nooner v. State , 2013 Ark. 317 ( 2013 )

Cite as 2013 Ark. 317SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No. CR-13-544
Opinion Delivered September 5, 2013
PRO SE MOTIONS FOR
TERRICK NOONER APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL, FOR
APPELLANT EXTRAORDINARY WRITS AND
EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION AND
v. TEMPORARY RELIEF, FOR WRIT OF
CERTIORARI, AND FOR SANCTIONS
STATE OF ARKANSAS [SALINE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
APPELLEE 63CR-93-133, HON. GRISHAM
PHILLIPS, JUDGE]
APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTIONS
MOOT.
PER CURIAM
In 1993, appellant Terrick Nooner was found guilty by a jury of aggravated robbery and
sentenced to life imprisonment. We affirmed. Nooner v. State, 319 Ark. 335, 891 S.W.2d 366(1995). The mandate in the case was issued in 1995.
On March 25, 2013, appellant filed in the trial court a pro se petition for postconviction
relief pursuant to Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 37.1 (1993). The trial court denied the
petition, and appellant has lodged an appeal in this court from the order. Now before us are
appellant’s motions for appointment of counsel, for extraordinary writs and expedited
consideration and temporary relief, for writ of certiorari, and for sanctions to be imposed.
As it is clear from the record that appellant could not prevail if the appeal were permitted
to go forward, the appeal is dismissed, and the motions are moot. An appeal from an order that
Cite as 2013 Ark. 317denied a petition for postconviction relief will not be permitted to proceed where it is clear that
the appellant could not prevail. Burks v. State, 2013 Ark. 198 (per curiam); Davis v. State, 2013
Ark. 118 (per curiam).
The trial court did not err in holding that the Rule 37.1 petition filed by appellant in 2013
was untimely. When a judgment is affirmed on appeal, and the mandate is issued, a petitioner
under the Rule is required, pursuant to Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 37.2(c)(ii), to file
his or her petition with the clerk of the trial court within sixty days of the date that the mandate
was issued. See Maxwell v. State, 298 Ark. 329, 767 S.W.2d 303 (1989). Appellant’s petition was
filed approximately eighteen years after the mandate was issued in his case. Accordingly, he did
not timely file his petition, and it was subject to dismissal on that basis.
Time limitations imposed in Rule 37.2(c) for filing a petition are jurisdictional in nature.
Murphy v. State, 2013 Ark. 243 (per curiam); O’Brien v. State, 339 Ark. 138, 3 S.W.3d 332 (1999);
see also Maxwell, 298 Ark. 329, 767 S.W.2d 303. If the time limitations are not met, a trial court
lacks jurisdiction to consider a Rule 37.1 petition. Holliday v. State, 2013 Ark. 47 (per curiam).
Where the circuit court lacks jurisdiction, the appellate court also lacks jurisdiction. Holliday,
2013 Ark. 47 (citing Winnett v. State, 2012 Ark. 404 (per curiam)); see also Clark v. State, 362 Ark.
545, 210 S.W.3d 59 (2005) (citing Priest v. Polk, 322 Ark. 673, 912 S.W.2d 902 (1995)).
Appeal dismissed; motions moot.
Terrick Nooner, pro se appellant.
No response.
2