ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
No. CR 0630
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
LAVERNE OTIS REED
Appellant
v.
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Appellee
Opinion Delivered
March 16, 2006
PRO SE MOTION FOR DUPLICATION OF
ADDENDUM TO APPELLANT’S BRIEF AT
PUBLIC EXPENSE [CIRCUIT COURT OF
MISSISSIPPI COUNTY, CHICKASAWBA
DISTRICT, CR 2004150]
MOTION DENIED
PER CURIAM
In 2005, judgment was entered reflecting that Laverne Otis Reed had entered a plea of guilty
to robbery for which a sentence of 240 months’ imprisonment was imposed. Reed subsequently
timely filed in the trial court a petition for postconviction relief pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule
37.1 in which he sought to have the judgment vacated or modified. The petition was denied, and
Reed has lodged an appeal from the order in this court. Appellant Reed tendered his brief without
the required addendum appended to each copy, and he now seeks to have the addendum duplicated
at public expense.
A Rule 37.1 proceeding is a civil proceeding, separate and distinct from the underlying
criminal conviction. Arkansas Public Defender Commission v. Greene County Circuit Court, 343
Ark. 49, 32 S.W.3d 470 (2000);Dyer v. State, 258 Ark. 494, 527 S.W.2d 622 (1975). There is no
right under our rules or any constitutional provision to have a brief or a portion of a brief in a
postconviction or other civil case duplicated at public expense. See Maxie v. Gaines, 317 Ark. 229,
876 S.W.2d 572 (1994) (per curiam). Nevertheless, in those cases where the indigent appellant
makes a substantial showing in a motion that the appeal has merit and that he or she cannot provide
the court with a sufficient number of copies of the brief or addendum, we will request that the
Attorney General duplicate the brief or addendum.
2
In the motion at bar appellant has failed to offer any showing of substantial merit to the
appeal. Accordingly, he has not shown that the addendum to the brief should be duplicated at public
expense. Our clerk is directed to return t