PER CURIAM 10
Ralph DOUTHITT v. STATE of Arkansas
___ S.W.3d ___
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Opinion delivered June 15, 2006
HABEAS CORPUS – JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENTS – FAILURE TO REBUT THE
PRESUMPTION THAT THE PETITIONWAS UNTIMELY FILED. – Where appellant filed his
petition for a writ of habeas corpus ten years after his conviction, a rebuttable
presumption arose that the petition was untimely filed under Ark. Code Ann. § 16
112202(10)(B) (Repl. 2006); where appellant did not make a showing that
incompetence, newly discovered evidence, manifest injustice, new testing methods,
or good cause prevented him from filing his petitionwithin thirtysix months from the
date of his conviction, appellant failed to rebut the presumption that the petition was
untimely filed and his appeal was dismissed.
Pro se Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief; appeal dismissed; motion moot.
Ralph Douthitt, pro se, for appellant.
DOUTHITT v. STATE
Cite as 36_ Ark. ___ (2006)
PER CURIAM 10
In 1995, appellant RalphDouthitt was convicted by a jury of sixtyone
counts of felony rape, incest, and violationofaminor, andwas sentenced to 174 years’ imprisonment.
We affirmed. Douthitt v. State, 326 Ark. 794, 935 S.W.2d 241 (1996). Subsequently, appellant
belatedly sought postconviction relief pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1. The trial court denied
appellant’s motion to file a belated Rule 37.1 petition. Appellant tendered the record on appeal to
this court and sought a motion for rule on clerk. We denied the motion. Douthitt v. State, CR 98
272 (Ark. Apr. 16, 1998) (per curiam).
In 2002, appellant filed a petition for writ of error coram nobis in the trial court. We affirmed
the trial court’s dismissal due to appellant’s improper procedure in pursuing the writ. Douthitt v.
State, CR 011 (Ark. Apr. 11, 2002) (per curiam), petition for rehearing denied, Douthitt v.