ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II
No. CR-13-916
ROBERT LEE SANDRELLI Opinion Delivered September 3, 2014
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE SEBASTIAN
V. COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FORT
SMITH DISTRICT
[NO. CR-12-1189]
STATE OF ARKANSAS
APPELLEE HONORABLE J. MICHAEL
FITZHUGH, JUDGE
REBRIEFING ORDERED
PHILLIP T. WHITEAKER, Judge
Appellant Robert Lee Sandrelli was convicted by a Sebastian County jury of four
counts of rape and was sentenced to four consecutive sentences of thirty-five years to be
served in the Arkansas Department of Correction. Sandrelli appeals the convictions,
challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. However, we cannot address the sufficiency-of-
the-evidence issue at this time because rebriefing is necessary pursuant to Arkansas Supreme
Court Rule 4-2 (2013).
Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(8) requires that an appellant’s brief include an
addendum consisting of all documents essential to this court’s resolution of the issues on
appeal, including exhibits such as CDs and DVDs. Rule 4-2(a)(8) further requires that all
stenographically reported materials introduced as an exhibit be abstracted.
Cite as
Sandrelli’s abstract and addendum do not comply with these provisions. At trial, the
State introduced and played three audio recordings for the jury: two interviews between
Sandrelli and the police and one interview between the victim and a forensic interviewer.
Sandrelli, however, failed to include copies of the audio recordings in his addendum as
required by our rules. Additionally, transcripts of these interviews were also admitted into
evidence and are contained in the record. While Sandrelli did abstract his interviews with the
police, he failed to abstract the interview between the victim and the forensic interviewer as
required.
Because Sandrelli’s abstract and addendum are inadequate, we order him to file within
fifteen days of this opinion a substituted abstract, brief, and addendum that complies with our
rules. See Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(3). We remind counsel that the examples we have noted
are not to be taken as an exhaustive list of deficiencies and ask that counsel carefully review
the rules to ensure that no other deficiencies exist.
Rebriefing ordered.
GLADWIN, C.J., and PITTMAN, J., agree.
David L. Dunagin, for appellant.
Dustin McDaniel, Att’y Gen., by: Valerie Glover Fortner, for appellee.
2
