Valenzuela v. State

Summary

The Arkansas Supreme Court addresses procedural issues arising from an untimely criminal appeal and notices of appeal signed by an attorney not licensed to practice in Arkansas. After concluding that disciplinary proceedings against that attorney had been resolved, the court directed the clerk to remove him as counsel, appointed new counsel for the indigent appellant, and left the appeal with the court of appeals to address the pending motion to dismiss and related jurisdictional issues.

Holdings

1. Because Waldman was enjoined from practicing law in Arkansas, the clerk was directed to remove him as Valenzuela's attorney and to accept no further pleadings from him in the matter.
2. Because the record showed that Valenzuela was indigent, new counsel was to be promptly appointed to represent him on appeal.
3. The court of appeals was directed to address and decide the State's motion to dismiss and the other pending and associated jurisdictional issues.

Questions Presented

1. What action should the Supreme Court take regarding an appeal in which the notices of appeal were signed by an attorney not authorized to practice law in Arkansas?
2. Whether the appeal and the State's remaining jurisdictional motion should proceed after the disciplinary proceedings against Waldman were resolved.

Disposition

remanded