ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

PER CURIAM

JULY 9, 2001

JOHN LEE HUDDLESTON

Appellant

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

Appellee

CR 00-697

PRO SE MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT ABSTRACT WITH ABSTRACT OF TRIAL RECORD [CIRCUIT COURT OF SEBASTIAN COUNTY, FORT SMITH DISTRICT, NO. CR 96-358(I)]

MOTION MOOT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, APPELLANT DIRECTED TO AMEND MOTION

In 1998, John Lee Huddleston was found guilty 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.

Appellant Huddleston was granted access to the transcript of his trial and the record in this appeal to prepare a substituted brief which he filed on March 16, 2001. Huddleston v. State, CR 00-697 (February 15, 2001). On May 8, 2001, appellant filed the instant motion asking to be allowed to abstract the trial record as part of the Rule 37 appeal. The relief requested in the motion is unclear inasmuch as we have already granted appellant access to the transcript of his trial for the purposes of abstracting that portion of the trial record necessary to this appeal and the substituted brief filed by appellant contains an abstract of certain portions of the trial. If appellant is asking to consolidate the trial transcript and the postconviction appeal record for the purposes of the appeal, the motion is unnecessary 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).

If appellant is seeking some other relief, he is directed to file within fourteen days an amendment to the instant motion explaining the nature of the relief being sought.

Motion moot.