ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

March 25, 2004

TERRICK NOONER

Appellant

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

Appellee

CR 94-358

PRO SE MOTIONS TO LIFT STAY OF EXECUTION

MOTIONS MOOT

Per Curiam

Terrick Nooner was found guilty by a jury of capital murder and sentenced to death. We affirmed. Nooner v. State, 322 Ark. 87, 907 S.W.2d 677 (1995). Mr. Nooner subsequently filed in the trial court a petition pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule 37. The petition was denied, and the order was affirmed. Nooner v. State, 339 Ark. 253, 4 S.W.3d 497 (1999).

In 2003, Nooner filed a pro se motion to lift the stay of execution in his case. We declared the motion moot because there was no stay of execution as such in effect. Nooner v. State, 352 Ark. 481, 101 S.W.3d 834 (2003)(per curiam). Nooner then asked that the motion be reconsidered. The motion for reconsideration was denied. Nooner v. State, CR 94-358 (Ark. May 15, 2003) (per curiam).

On February 13, 2004, and February 27, 2004, Nooner filed the pro se motions now before us in which he again asks that this court lift the stay of execution in his case. As we said when the motion to lift the stay of execution was denied in 2003, the circuit court was obligated to vacate the stay of execution it issued when petitioner's Rule 37.1 petition was affirmed on appeal. See A. R. Cr. P. 37.5(g)(2). In its response to the 2003 motion, the State said that it did not intend to request that the Governor set another execution date until such time as petitioner had exhausted his federal remedies. There is nothing on our docket or in petitioner's motions to indicate that there has been any change in petitioner's status; that is, there is nothing to show that an execution date has been set or that there is a stay in effect at this time. Accordingly, petitioner's motions are moot.

Motions denied.