Page:Harris v. State.pdf/1

Harvey HARRIS v. STATE of Arkansas

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Opinion delivered November 7, 1994

1. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE—POST-CONVICTION RELIEF—CRIMINAL PROCEDURE RULE 37 GOVERNS OVER STATUTES.—Criminal Procedure Rule 37.2(b) provides in pertinent part that all grounds for post-conviction relief, including claims that a sentence is illegal or illegally imposed, must be raised in a petition under Rule 37; statutes are given deference only to the extent that they are compatible with the rules, and conflicts which compromise these rules are resolved with the rules remaining supreme.
2. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE—TIME LIMITS IMPOSED IN RULE 37 JURISDICTIONAL—RELIEF MAY NOT BE GRANTED ON AN UNTIMELY PETITION.—The time limitations imposed in Rule 37 are jurisdictional in nature, and the circuit court may not grant relief on an untimely petition.
3. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE—TIME LIMITATION FOR A PETITION UNDER THE RULE EXCEEDED—MOTION DENIED.—Criminal Procedure Rule 37.2(c) provides that a petition under the rule is untimely if not filed within sixty days of issuance of the appellate court's mandate affirming the judgment of conviction; where the mandate was issued on January 7, 1994, but the petition to correct the sentences imposed was not filed until more than sixty days from the date of the mandate, the appellant did not file his petition to correct the sentences imposed on him within the time limit set by Rule 37; Rule 37 was controlling over Ark. Code Ann. § 16-90-111 (Supp. 1991), the petition was untimely, and the appellant was not entitled to relief in circuit court; the appellant's motion for appointment of counsel was denied.

Pro Se Motion for Appointment of Counsel; motion denied and appeal dismissed.

Pro se.

No response.

PER CURIAM. In 1993 Harvey Harris was found guilty by a jury of two counts of delivery of a controlled substance. He was sentenced to two terms of twenty years imprisonment to be served consecutively. We affirmed. Harris v. State, 315 Ark. 398, 868