ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

PER CURIAM

June 7, 2001

JAMES H. WILLIAMS JR.

Appellant

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

Appellee

CR 99-1006

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, CIV-99-309-2-3, HONORABLE FRED D. DAVIS III, JUDGE

AFFIRMED

Appellant is serving a sentence of life imprisonment without parole for capital felony murder. We affirmed appellant's conviction and sentence in Williams v. State, 288 Ark. 444, 705 S.W.2d 888 (1986). In 1999, appellant filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Jefferson County Circuit Court. The circuit court denied the petition, concluding that appellant had failed to state a claim upon which a writ of habeas corpus could issue. We affirm.

A writ of habeas corpus is proper when a judgment of conviction is invalid on its face or when a circuit court lacked jurisdiction over the cause. Davis v. Reed, 316 Ark. 575, 577, 873 S.W.2d 524, 525 (1994). Appellant raised several claims in his petition that are not cognizable in a habeas corpus proceeding. He also alleged, however, that his judgment of conviction was invalid on its face and that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over his case. Despite appellant's allegations of error, we cannot reach the merits of appellant's appeal because his abstract is flagrantlydeficient

Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(6) requires an appellant to include an abstract of the material parts of the record that are necessary to an understanding of the questions presented for decision. The abstracting requirement applies to those appellants who proceed pro se. Jackson v. State, 316 Ark. 509, 510, 872 S.W.2d 400, 400 (1994). We have often held that a summary of the pleadings and the judgment appealed from are the bare essentials of an abstract. Johnson v. State, 342 Ark. 357, 361, 28 S.W.3d 286, 288 (2000). This court does not presume error simply because an appeal is made. Id. It is the appellant's burden to produce a record sufficient to demonstrate error, and the record on appeal is confined to that which is abstracted. Id. We have noted that with only one record on appeal and seven justices, it is essential that the material parts of the record be abstracted. Id.

Here, appellant has failed to abstract any part of the record, including his petition and the circuit court's order denying relief. Appellant's brief consists of a statement of the case, his argument, and copies of various documents in violation of our Addendum rule. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(8). Appellant's brief is flagrantly deficient, and under such circumstances, we affirm. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(3).

Affirmed.