ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
No. CR 071084
ROBERT ALFRED WILLIAMS
Petitioner
v.
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Respondent
Opinion Delivered
December 6, 2007
PRO SE PETITION FOR REVIEW
[CACR 061180] [CIRCUIT COURT OF
COLUMBIA COUNTY, CR 2005145,
HON. LARRY CHANDLER, JUDGE]
PETITION DISMISSED.
PER CURIAM
A jury found petitioner Robert AlfredWilliams guilty of aggravated robbery and firstdegree
battery and sentenced him to an aggregate term of 1680 months’ imprisonment in the Arkansas
Department ofCorrection. The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment. Williams v. State,
CACR 061180 (Ark. App. Oct. 3, 2007). Petitioner has filed a pro se pleading with our clerk
seeking review of that decision, which was accordingly filed in this court as a petition for review
under Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 12(b). We dismiss the petition because the pleading was filed pro se.
Mr. William O. James, Jr. was appointed to represent petitioner on appeal and did so,
submitting a brief on his behalf. An appellant is not entitled to accept appointment of counsel to
represent him and also proceed pro se. Brewer v. State, ___ Ark. ___, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Nov. 15,
2007); Hamilton v. State, 348 Ark. 532, 74 S.W.3d 615 (2002). This court will not permit an
appellant to compete with his attorney to be heard in an appeal. Franklin v. State, 327 Ark. 537, 939
S.W.2d 836 (1997) (per curiam); see also Monts v. Lessenberry, 305 Ark. 202, 806 S.W.2d 379
2
(1991) (per curiam).
As we explained in Monts, counsel possesses the superior ability to examine the record,
research the law and marshal arguments in the defendant’s behalf. With the exception of certain
fundamental decisions, it is the attorney’s duty to take professional responsibility for the conduct of
the case, after consulting with his client. Monts, 305 Ark. at 206, 806 S.W.2d at 381382. An
appellant has no constitutional right to participate in his representation on direct appeal. Fudge v.
State, 341 Ark. 652, 19 S.W.3d 22 (2000) (per curiam)