ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

PER CURIAM

May 17, 2001

MITCHELL SKINNER

Petitioner

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

Respondent

CR 00-1361

PRO SE MOTION FOR RULE ON CLERK [CIRCUIT COURT OF WHITE COUNTY, NO. CR 95-212, HON. ROBERT EDWARDS, JUDGE]

MOTION DENIED

In 1996, Mitchell Skinner pleaded guilty to capital felony murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. In 2000, Skinner filed a pro se petition for writ of error coram nobis in the trial court. The petition was denied, and petitioner Skinner filed a notice of appeal from the order rather than a petition for writ of certiorari in this court which is the proper avenue to seek review of the denial of an coram nobis action. Larrimore v. State, 327 Ark. 271, 938 S.W.2d 818 (1997), citing Penn v. State, 282 Ark. 571, 670 S.W.2d 426 (1984). Petitioner took no further action in this court, until he was notified on October 5, 2000, that the circuit clerk had forwarded the record to this court in response to the notice of appeal.

On November 28, 2000, petitioner filed here a motion for rule on clerk seeking to be permitted to proceed with a review of the court's decision to deny the coram nobis petition. Themotion was denied. Skinner v. State, 344 Ark. 184, ___ S.W.3d ___ (2001).

Petitioner subsequently tendered a petition for rehearing which our clerk correctly declined to file pursuant to In Re Motions for Reconsideration in Post-Conviction Matters, 319 Ark. Appx. 826 (1994), in which we said:

This court frequently acts on motions filed in the course

of appeals of orders denying post-conviction relief pursuant to

Arkansas Criminal Procedure Rule 37, Ark. Code Ann. §16-

90-111 (Supp. 1991), statutes which govern the issuance of

writs of habeas corpus and mandamus as well as other legal

remedies such error coram nobis proceedings and others. As

there is no provision in the prevailing rules of procedure

for a motion for reconsideration to be filed after this court

has denied a motion which stems from a post-conviction

matter, such motions will no longer be filed. (emphasis

added)

Now before us is petitioner Skinner's motion for rule on clerk asking that the clerk be directed to file the petition for rehearing. The motion is denied inasmuch as the petition for rehearing submitted by petitioner clearly falls within the purview of the above-cited decision.

Motion denied.