Dixon v. State

In Dixon v. State, 314 Ark. 378, 863 S.W.2d 282 (1993), the supreme court stated: Appellant then filed a motion asking for a dismissal for lack of a speedy trial. The trial court heard arguments and apparently examined the docket sheet and various orders and denied the motion to dismiss. Appellant's abstract does not summarize the proof at that hearing, nor does it summarize the findings of fact by the trial court, nor does it summarize the written order, if any, by the trial court. We cannot know, without examining the transcript, the periods of time that the trial court found to be excluded. In sum, we have no way of knowing whether the trial court erred without examining the transcript. As we have often pointed out, there is only one transcript and there are seven judges on this court, and it is impossible for each of the seven judges to examine the one transcript. Kitchen v. State, 271 Ark. 1, 607 S.W.2d 345 (1980). We are hesitant to affirm a criminal case for failure to comply with Rule 4-2, but we must do so in this case because the abstract wholly omits the hearing and ruling on the motion that is the basis of the appeal. (Dixon v. State, 314 Ark. at 378-79.)