ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

PER CURIAM

FEBRUARY 15, 2001

JOHN LEE HUDDLESTON

Appellant

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

Appellee

CR 00-697

PRO SE MOTIONS TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD AND TO SUBSTITUTE, SUPPLEMENT, OR AMEND ABSTRACT [CIRCUIT COURT OF SEBASTIAN COUNTY, FORT SMITH DISTRICT, NO. CR 96-358(I)]

MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD MOOT; MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE, SUPPLEMENT, OR AMEND ABSTRACT DENIED; APPELLANT DIRECTED TO SUBMIT SUBSTITUTED BRIEF

In 1998, John Lee Huddleston was found guilty of by a jury of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver and possession of drug paraphernalia. He was sentenced as a habitual offender to life plus ten years' imprisonment . We affirmed. Huddleston v. State , 329 Ark. 266, 5 S.W.3d 46 (1999). Huddleston subsequently filed in the trial court a timely petition pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule 37 seeking to vacate the judgment. The petition was denied, and the record on appeal from the order has been lodged here.

After both appellant Huddleston and the appellee filed briefs, appellant filed the two instant motions. Appellant asks to be permitted to supplement the record with the transcript of his trial and also states that he needs access to the trial transcript to prepare his brief. He furtherstates that he retained an attorney to represent him in this appeal and is dissatisfied with the brief prepared by counsel. He asks to be permitted to file a supplemental pro se brief with an adequate abstract.

We first note that no attorney has filed an entry of appearance in this appeal and appellant remains a pro se litigant. Insofar as appellant is seeking to consolidate the record in this postconviction appeal with the trial record lodged on direct appeal of the judgment, the motion is moot because the transcript of a trial which has been lodged in the appellate court on direct appeal of the judgment is a public record. As such, a motion to incorporate it into the record in a postconviction appeal which stems from the same judgment of conviction is not necessary. Drymon v. State, 327 Ark. 375, 938 S.W.2d 825 (1997).

With respect to appellant's desire for access to the trial transcript so that he may abstract those portions of the trial as are pertinent to the postconviction appeal, we direct our clerk to provide appellant with a copy of the trial transcript and the postconviction appeal record so that he may prepare a substituted brief. The clerk is further directed to discard the brief already filed by appellant. The substituted appellant's brief is due here no later than forty days from the date of this opinion. The appellee will also be allowed to file a substituted brief within thirty days of the date the appellant's substituted brief is filed if it desires to do so or it may stand on the appellee's brief already filed.

Motion to supplement record moot; motion to substitute, supplement, or amend abstract denied; appellant directed to submit substituted brief.