SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No. CR-16-63
Opinion Delivered: April 13, 2017
KENNETH RAY MARSHALL
APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE COLUMBIA
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
V. [NO. 14CR-14-2]
STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE HAMILTON H.
APPELLEE SINGLETON, JUDGE
SUPPLEMENTAL RECORD
ORDERED; SUBSTITUTED
BRIEFING ORDERED.
PER CURIAM
A jury found appellant, Kenneth Ray Marshall, guilty of aggravated residential
burglary and commercial burglary, and he was sentenced as a habitual offender to life
imprisonment for the former and thirty years’ imprisonment for the latter, with the sentences
to run consecutively. Because Marshall received a sentence of life imprisonment, this court
“must review all errors prejudicial to the appellant in accordance with
(a).” Ark. Sup.Ct. R. 4-3(i) (2016). Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-3(i) further
provides as follows:
To make that review possible, the appellant must abstract, or include in the
Addendum, as appropriate, all rulings adverse to him or her made by the circuit court
on all objections, motions and requests made by either party, together with such parts
of the record as are needed for an understanding of each adverse ruling. The Attorney
General will make certain and certify that all of those objections have been abstracted,
or included in the Addendum, and will brief all points argued by the appellant and
any other points that appear to involve prejudicial error.
Cite as
In reviewing the record, the abstract, and the addendum, we have discovered that
both the docket sheet and the circuit court’s statements at trial indicate that the circuit court
held a hearing on January 14, 2015, regarding a motion for speedy trial and a motion for a
change of venue. According to the docket sheet and the circuit court’s statements, both
motions were denied. Though Marshall designated the entire trial record as the record on
appeal, the record does not contain a transcript of that hearing. Thus, the record on appeal
is incomplete. Without a complete record, this court cannot conduct a meaningful review
of the denial of these two motions, as Rule 4-3(i) requires. Romes v. State,
(2003) (per curiam) (holding that the court could not conduct a meaningful
review of an adverse ruling without a complete record).
Accordingly, we order that a supplemental certified transcript of the hearing be filed
with the clerk of this court within thirty days from the date of this per curiam. Once the
transcript has been filed, we direct the parties to file with this court substituted briefs that
satisfy their respective obligations under Rule 4-3(i), with the clerk of this court to set a
briefing schedule.
Also, despite both Marshall’s obligation under Rule 4-3(i) to abstract or include in
the addendum all rulings adverse to him and the Attorney General’s certification that
Marshall had done so, we note that there are adverse rulings in the current record that were
not abstracted. Accordingly, we further order the parties to reexamine the entire record and
complete their respective duties under Rule 4-3(i).
Supplemental record ordered; substituted briefing ordered.
2
