ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

DECEMBER 18, 2003

JOHNNY DODSON

Appellant

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

Appellee

CR 02-1221

PRO SE MOTIONS FOR DUPLICATION OF SUBSTITUTED BRIEF AT PUBLIC EXPENSE AND FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL [CIRCUIT COURT OF MONROE COUNTY, NO. CR 95-172]

MOTIONS DENIED; BRIEF TIME EXTENDED FORTY DAYS

Per Curiam

In 1999, Johnny Dodson was found guilty of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver and possession of a controlled substance. An aggregate sentence of twenty-five years' imprisonment was imposed. We affirmed. Dodson v. State, 341 Ark. 41, 14 S.W.3d 489 (2000). In 2000, Dodson filed in the trial court a timely pro se petition for postconviction relief pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule 37.1 challenging the judgment of conviction. The court denied the petition, and Dodson appealed to this court.

Appellant filed a brief on appeal which was found to be deficient. As a result, he was directed to submit a substituted brief. Dodson v. State, CR 02-1221 (Ark. October 2, 2003). Now before us are appellant's motions asking that the substituted brief be duplicated at public expense and that counsel be appointed to represent him.

There is no right under our rules or any constitutional provision to have a brief in a postconviction or a civil case duplicated at public expense. See Maxie v. Gaines, 317 Ark. 231, 876 S.W.2d 572 (1994). Nevertheless, in those cases where the indigent appellant makes a substantial showing, in a motion to have the appellant's brief duplicated, that the appeal has merit and that he cannot provide the court with a sufficient number of copies of the brief, we will request the Attorney General to duplicate the brief. In the motion at bar, appellant has failed to offer any showing of substantial merit to the appeal. Accordingly, appellant is obligated to submit seventeen copies of the appellant's brief. The time to file the appellant's substituted brief is extended to forty days from the date of this opinion.

With respect to the motion for appointment of counsel, postconviction matters are considered civil in nature with respect to the right to counsel, and there is no absolute right to appointment of counsel in civil matters. See Virgin v. Lockhart, 288 Ark. 92, 702 S.W.2d 9 (1986). As with duplication of briefs at public expense, however, we have held that if an appellant makes a substantial showing that he is entitled to relief in a postconviction appeal and that he cannot proceed without counsel, we will appoint counsel. See Howard v. Lockhart, 300 Ark. 144, 777 S.W.2d 223 (1989). As stated above, appellant here has not demonstrated that there is merit to the appeal.

Motions denied; brief time extended forty days.