SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No. CR06-821
LUWALHATI LALOTA,
APPELLANT,
VS.
STATE OF ARKANSAS,
APPELLEE,
Opinion Delivered
MOTION FOR RULE ON CLERK
REMANDED.
PER CURIAM
Appellant Luwalhati Admana Johnson, aka Luwalhati Lalota, acting pro se, has filed
a motion for rule on clerk asking this court to direct the clerk of the court to file her record
and have her appeal docketed. The clerk refused to docket her appeal and would not accept
the record due to a failure to comply with Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure-Civil
5(b)(1)(C). Appellant explains that by its plain meaning Rule 5(b)(1)(C) does not make a
hearing mandatory because all parties may have the opportunity to be heard either at a
hearing or by responding in writing. If neither a hearing nor a response in writing takes
place, the Appellant maintains that a waiver has occurred and the extension for time may be
granted.
This court has held that Rule 5(b)(1) applies to both civil and criminal cases for the
determination of the timeliness of a record on appeal. See Roy v. State, ___ Ark. ___, ___
S.W.3d ___ (June 29, 2006). Rule 5(b)(1) provides:
(1) If any party has designated stenographically reported material for inclusion
in the record on appeal, the circuit court, by order entered before expiration
-2-
CR06-821
of the period prescribed by subdivision (a) of this rule or a prior extension
order, may extend the time for filing the record only if it makes the following
findings:
(A) The appellant has filed a motion explaining the reasons for
the requested extension and served the motion on all counsel of
record;
(B) The time to file the record on appeal has not yet expired;
(C)All parties have had the opportunity to be heard on the
motion, either at a hearing or by responding in writing;
(D) The appellant, in compliance with Rule 6(b), has timely
ordered the stenographically reported material from the court
reporter and made any financial arrangements required by its
preparation; and
(E) An extension of time is necessary for the court reporter to
incl