No. CR 87-139
Opinion delivered February 22, 1988 [Rehearing denied March 14, 1988.]
1. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — POSTCONVICTION RELIEF — SECOND RULE 37 PETITION PROHIBITED. — Where the supreme court denied the appellant relief under A.R.Cr.P. Rule 37 in 1984, it will not consider an appeal from an order of the trial court denying a motion to set aside his prior convictions since the appellant is merely attempting to avoid the rule which prohibits a second Rule 37 petition. 2. APPEAL ERROR — SELF-REPRESENTATION DOES NOT EXCUSE AN APPELLANT FROM COMPLYING WITH THE RULES OF THE COURT. — The fact that appellant represented himself did not excuse him from complying with the rules of the court.
Appeal from Clark Circuit Court; J. Hugh Lookadoo, Judge; affirmed.
Appellant, pro se.
Steve Clark, Att'y Gen., by: Lee Taylor Franke, Asst. Att'y Gen., for appellee.
[1, 2] The appellant, Zakee Kaleem Abdullah, a/k/a Robert Earl White, appeals from an order of the trial court denying a motion to set aside his 1982 convictions. We denied the appellant relief under Rule 37 in 1984. Abdullah v. State, 281 Ark. 239, 663 S.W.2d 166 (1984). The appellant is merely attempting to avoid the rule which prohibits a second Rule 37 petition. Ruiz v. State, 280 Ark. 190, 655 S.W.2d 441 (1983). Furthermore, the appellant failed to abstract the record of the hearing which was held on this petition. The fact that he represents himself does not excuse him from complying with the rules of the court. Bryant v. Lockhart, 288 Ark. 302, 705 S.W.2d 9 (1986); Weston v. State, 265 Ark. 58, 576 S.W.2d 705 (1979).