ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
No. CR 06-1486
JAMES WESLEY JOHNSON
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Opinion Delivered March 8, 2007
PRO SE MOTION FOR EXTENSION
OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT’S
BRIEF [CIRCUIT COURT OF
PULASKI COUNTY, CR 90-394, HON.
JOHN W. LANGSTON, JUDGE]
APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION
In 1990, James Wesley Johnson was found guilty by a jury of two counts of delivery of a
controlled substance, and sentenced as a habitual offender to forty years’ imprisonment on each
count, to be served concurrently. Subsequently, he sought postconviction relief in the trial court, and
this court dismissed the appeal from the denial of his petition. Johnson v. State, CR 95-497 (Ark.
Oct. 10, 1995) (per curiam). Later, appellant filed a petition for postconviction relief pursuant to our
now superseded Criminal Procedure Rule 36.4. The circuit court denied the petition, and this court
affirmed on appeal. Johnson v. State, 333 Ark. 1, 968 S.W.2d 51 (1998). Next, appellant sought
to correct the sentence pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 16-90-111 (1991). The trial court denied the
petition, and we affirmed. Johnson v. State, CR 03-1248 (Ark. Oct. 7, 2004) (per curiam).
In 2006, appellant filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the trial court. The trial court
denied the petition, and appellant, proceeding pro se, has lodged an appeal in this court from that
Now before us is appellant’s pro se motion for extension of time to file appellant’s brief. We
Act 1780 of 2001, as amended by Act 2250 of 2005, and codified as Ark. Code Ann. §§
16-112-201 – 207 (Repl. 2006), provides that a writ of habeas corpus can issue based upon new
scientific evidence proving a person actually innocent of the offense or offenses for which he or
she was convicted.
need not consider this motion as it is apparent that appellant could not prevail in this appeal if it were
permitted to go forward. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal and hold the motion moot. This court
has consistently held that