Kelley v. Shults

Summary

In this dissenting opinion, Justice Rhonda K. Wood argues that the Arkansas Supreme Court should consider the State's emergency request for a temporary stay despite the absence of a written circuit-court order in the appellate record. She contends that the filing requirement is procedural rather than jurisdictional and that the court should order the State to supplement the record under Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure–Civil 6(e), rather than dismiss the stay request.

Holdings

1. In the dissent's view, the requirement that a circuit court reduce an oral pronouncement to a filed written order is procedural rather than jurisdictional and did not require dismissal of the emergency stay request.
2. The dissent would have ordered the State to supplement the record with the subsequently filed written order instead of dismissing the request for a stay.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the absence of a filed written order deprived the Supreme Court of Arkansas of jurisdiction to consider the State's emergency request for a temporary stay.
2. Whether the court should permit the State to supplement the appellate record with the subsequently filed written order rather than dismissing the stay request.

Disposition

dismissed