Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 190
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION IV
No. CR-13-204
Opinion Delivered March 19, 2014
TRENTON HOLLEY APPEAL FROM THE FAULKNER
APPELLANT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. 23CR-11-448]
V.
HONORABLE CHARLES E.
STATE OF ARKANSAS CLAWSON, JUDGE
APPELLEE
REMANDED TO SETTLE AND
SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD;
REBRIEFING ORDERED
BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge
Trenton Holley was found guilty by a Faulkner County jury of sexually assaulting
his stepdaughter in the second degree. He was sentenced by the circuit court to seventeen
years in the Arkansas Department of Correction. On appeal, Holley argues that the circuit
court erred when it denied his motion to suppress. And there is an issue about evidence
admitted during sentencing. We cannot decide the merits of Holley’s appeal yet because
his brief, and the record, remain deficient despite our prior effort to posture this case for a
merits-based decision. Holley v. State, 2013 Ark. App. 668.
On the record deficiency, we need the transcripts that the court relied on and
referenced in its 18 July 2012 suppression order. We also need unredacted audio
recordings of the following events: one, the phone call between Holley and his wife that
1
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 190
Joni Clark recorded; two, the first time the police interviewed Holley; three, we need the
second interview/custodial interrogation conducted between Holley and Joni Clark.
Holley’s abstract fails to include Dusty Holley’s testimony from the pretrial hearing;
and it excludes material portions of the attorneys’ arguments during the July 6 hearing.
We need this information. In the forthcoming corrected abstract, Holley must include the
supplemental record material that we mentioned above. Moving to the addendum, the
forthcoming corrected one needs to include unredacted copies of the three audio
recordings that we mentioned. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(8)(A)(i) (2013).
The State’s brief is not without blemish: it cites directly to the record, which is
improper. Russell v. Russell, 2012 Ark. App. 647, at 1 (“Appellee’[s] . . . brief refers to
testimony by providing the page number of the record where the testimony may be
found. This is in contravention of Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2[.]”). If the State
identifies deficiencies in an appellant’s abstract or addendum, then it should place the
information before this court in a manner prescribed by Rule 4-2 if it wants the omitted
information considered; or the State may simply rely on the material the appellant’s brief
provides. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(7) and 4-2(b)(1).
The supplemental record must be compiled and filed within fifteen days of this
opinion’s date. Holley’s substituted brief, abstract, and addendum are due within fifteen
days after the supplemental record has been filed with this court’s clerk. Ark. Sup. Ct. R.
4-2(b)(3). The State should then, if it chooses to respond to Holley’s appellant’s brief, file
a compliant appellee’s brief within fifteen days of the filing of Holley’s second corrected
brief.
2
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 190
Remanded to settle and supplement the record; rebriefing ordered.
WOOD and WHITEAKER, JJ., agree.
Blagg Law Firm, by: Ralph Blagg and Nicki Nicolo, for appellant.
Dustin McDaniel, Att’y Gen., by: Eileen W. Harrison, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.
3