Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

Zakee Kaleem ABDULLAH, a/k/a Robert Earl White v. STATE of Arkansas

1. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — POSTCONVICTION RELIEF — SECOND RULE 37 PETITION PROHIBITED. — Where the supreme court denied the appellant relief under A.R.Cr.P. Rule 37 in 1984, it will not consider an appeal from an order of the trial court denying a motion to set aside his prior convictions since the appellant is merely attempting to avoid the rule which prohibits a second Rule 37 petition. 2. APPEAL ERROR — SELF-REPRESENTATION DOES NOT EXCUSE AN APPELLANT FROM COMPLYING WITH THE RULES OF THE COURT. — The fact that appellant represented himself did not excuse him from complying with the rules of the court.

DARRELL HICKMAN, Justice.

[1, 2] The appellant, Zakee Kaleem Abdullah, a/k/a Robert Earl White, appeals from an order of the trial court denying a motion to set aside his 1982 convictions. We denied the appellant relief under Rule 37 in 1984. Abdullah v. State, 281 Ark. 239, 663 S.W.2d 166 (1984). The appellant is merely attempting to avoid the rule which prohibits a second Rule 37 petition. Ruiz v. State, 280 Ark. 190, 655 S.W.2d 441 (1983). Furthermore, the appellant failed to abstract the record of the hearing which was held on this petition. The fact that he represents himself does not excuse him from complying with the rules of the court. Bryant v. Lockhart, 288 Ark. 302, 705 S.W.2d 9 (1986); Weston v. State, 265 Ark. 58, 576 S.W.2d 705 (1979).

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

ABDULLAH v. STATE
(Mar 14, 1988)