ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
No. CR 07597
ROBERT LOUIS ELKINS
Appellant
v.
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Appellee
Opinion Delivered
November 15, 2007
APPELLEE’S MOTION TO DISMISS
APPEAL; APPELLANT’S PRO SE
MOTIONS TO STAY APPEAL AND TO
AMEND [CIRCUIT COURT OF
MILLER COUNTY, CR 2004627, HON.
KIRK JOHNSON, JUDGE]
APPELLEE’S MOTION TO DISMISS
APPEAL GRANTED; PRO SE MOTION
TO STAY APPEAL TREATED AS
MOTION TO FILE BELATED BRIEF
AND DECLARED MOOT; PRO SE
MOTION TO AMEND MOOT.
PER CURIAM
In 2006, appellant Robert Louis Elkins was found guilty by a jury of aggravated robbery and
being a felon in possession of a firearm. An aggregate sentence of 1,200 months’ imprisonment was
imposed, whichwas to run consecutively to sentences he received in seven prior criminal cases. The
Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed. Elkins v. State, CACR 06529 (Ark. App. Dec. 13, 2006).
Subsequently, appellant timely filed in the trial court a verified pro se petition for relief
pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1. The trial court denied the petition without a hearing, and appellant
has lodged an appeal here from the order.
Now before us are a motion to dismiss the appeal filed by the State after appellant failed to
timely file his brief, appellant’s pro se motion to stay the appeal and pro se motion to amend the Rule
37.1 petition and for appointment of counsel. We treat appellant’s motion to stay the appeal as a
1 Attached to the motion to stay the appeal were a motion for extension of time and a
motion for appointment of counsel. According to the motion to stay, the attached motions
“should have been before the court long before expiration date for brief due.” However, neither
the motion for extension of time nor motion for appointment of counsel were ever filed of record
in this court.
2
motion to file a belated brief. 1 It is apparent that appellant could not prevail in this appeal if it were
permitted to go forward. Accordingly, we grant appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal, and hold
appellant’s