SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS.
No. CR-15-862
Opinion Delivered January 7, 2016
JAMES BRIAN WRIGHT
PETITIONER
PRO SE MOTION FOR BELATED APPEAL
V. OF JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION
[SEBASTIAN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
STATE OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DISTRICT, NO. 66CR-10-882]
RESPONDENT
MOTION DISMISSED.
PER CURIAM
On March 28, 2011, judgment was entered in the Sebastian County Circuit Court
reflecting that James Brian Wright had entered a plea of guilty to two counts of forgery in case
no. 66CR-10-882. An aggregate sentence of 60 months’ imprisonment was imposed.
On October 22, 2015, Wright tendered to this court a certified copy of the 2011
judgment with his pro se motion for leave to proceed with a belated appeal of the judgment.
The motion is dismissed because it was not timely tendered to this court and because the
judgment was entered on a plea of guilty.
Belated appeals in criminal cases are governed by Rule 2(e) of the Arkansas Rules of
Appellate Procedure–Criminal (2015). The rule provides in pertinent part that “no motion
for belated appeal shall be entertained by the Supreme Court unless application has been made
to the Supreme Court within eighteen (18) months of the date of entry of judgment or entry
of the order denying postconviction relief from which the appeal is taken.” Wright filed his
motion more than eighteen months after the judgment had been entered. Wright argues that
Cite as
he should be allowed to appeal because his attorney erred by not appealing the judgment, but
the eighteen-month period applies even to cases where the attorney admits fault for not
pursuing an appeal from an appealable judgment. See Bennett v. State,
(2005) (per curiam).
Moreover, even if the motion had been timely filed, Arkansas Rule of Appellate
Procedure–Criminal 1(a) (2015) provides that there is no direct appeal from a plea of guilty.
An exception is created when a conditional plea of guilty is premised on an appeal of the denial
of a suppression motion pursuant to Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 24.3 (2015). See
Seibs v. State,
(per curiam), are (1) when there is a challenge to testimony or evidence
presented before a jury in a sentencing hearing separate from the plea itself and (2) when the
appeal is from a posttrial motion challenging the validity and legality of the sentence itself. See
Bradford v. State,
(1999). We have held, however, that an appeal may be taken after a guilty plea when the
petitioner alleges evidentiary errors that arose after the plea and during the sentencing phase,
regardless of whether a jury was impaneled for that phase of trial. See Griffin v. State,
otherwise met any of the exceptions that would allow for an appeal from the judgment. For
that reason, his motion for belated appeal would have been subject to dismissal had it been
tendered within the time limitations of Rule 2(a). See Nelson,