ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

PER CURIAM

JANUARY 18, 2001

WALTER MACKINTRUSH

Appellant

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

Appellee

CR 99-952

PRO SE MOTIONS TO FILE OVER-LENGTH SUBSTITUTED BRIEF, TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD, and FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE SUBSTITUTED BRIEF and PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI [CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, NO. CR 94-3632, HON. JOHN LANGSTON, JUDGE]

MOTION TO FILE OVER-LENGTH SUBSTITUTED BRIEF MOOT; MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE SUBSTITUTED BRIEF GRANTED; MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD AND PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI DENIED

Walter Mackintrush was tried in 1995 on a charge of murder in the first degree. A mistrial was granted after the jury deadlocked. On retrial, Mackintrush was found guilty of murder in the second degree and sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment. The court of appeals affirmed. Mackintrush v. State, 60 Ark. App. 42, 959 S.W.2d 404 (1997). Mackintrush filed a petition for review in this court, and we affirmed. Mackintrush v. State, 334 Ark. 390, 978 S.W.2d 293 (1998). Mackintrush subsequently filed in the trial court a timely petition pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule 37 seeking to vacate the judgment. The petition was denied. The record on appeal of the order has been lodged here. Appellant is proceeding pro se on appeal.

We granted appellant Mackintrush leave to file a substituted brief in this appeal. Mackintrush v. State, CR 99-952 (May 25, 2000). Now before us are appellant's motion for an extension of time to file the substituted brief, which he tendered one day after the date it was due, motion for leave to file an over-length brief, to have the record supplemented, and a writ of certiorari to safeguard and complete the record.

The motion to file an over-length brief is moot because the argument portion of the tendered brief does not exceed the twenty-five pages for argument permitted by Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(e). The motion for extension of time is granted. Our clerk will file the substituted brief as of the date of this opinion.

Appellant's motion to supplement the record and petition for writ of certiorari are denied. Both motions may be considered together because each concerns appellant's first trial that ended in a mistrial when the jury dead-locked at eleven to one. The motions are an attempt to introduce into this appeal information about the mistrial apparently to bolster appellant's argument that his retrial constituted a violation of the constitutional provisions against double-jeopardy. We have already considered an earlier motion to supplement the record pertaining to this same argument and found no basis to supplement the record. Mackintrush v. State, CR 99-952 (December 9, 1999). Appellant has not demonstrated any cause to revisit that decision now.

Motions to file over-length substituted brief moot; motion for extension of time granted; motion for leave to supplement record and petition for writ of certiorari denied.