Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 498
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION I
No. CR-25-504
COREY TURNER Opinion Delivered October 28, 2026
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE CLARK
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
V. [NO. 10CR-18-82]
STATE OF ARKANSAS HONORABLE MARCIA R.
APPELLEE HEARNSBERGER, JUDGE
DISMISSED
N. MARK KLAPPENBACH, Chief Judge
Appellant Corey Turner appeals from the Clark County Circuit Court’s May 27,
2025 order denying his motion to credit his time spent in custody. On appeal, he argues
that the court erred in failing to award jail-time credit against his sentence on revocation of
his suspended imposition of sentence (SIS). We dismiss.
I. Relevant Facts
Turner pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine with purpose to deliver in
2018. As a habitual offender, he was sentenced to twenty years in the Arkansas Division of
Correction, with sixty days of jail-time credit, to be followed by a ten-year suspended
imposition of sentence (SIS). Turner attempted to file a petition for postconviction relief
under Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 37.1, and this court subsequently dismissed the appeal because Turner failed to abide by the verification requirements of Rule 37.1(c). Turner
v. State, 2020 Ark. App. 143, at 3–4.
On February 22, 2024, Turner was arrested and charged with new crimes. Following
these new charges, the State sought revocation of Turner’s SIS. The revocation in case No.
10CR-18-82 and the new charges in case No. 10CR-24-29 proceeded separately.
The court held a revocation hearing on January 14, 2025. At the hearing, Turner
admitted that he had violated the conditions of his SIS by possessing methamphetamine in
February and March 2023. Turner was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment, and a
sentencing order entered the same date recognized a “negotiated plea of guilty” to the fiveyear sentence of imprisonment with one day of jail-time credit.
A month after the sentencing order was entered, on February 13, 2025, Turner filed
a “Request for Jail Time Credit,” which does not appear to have been served on the State.
On March 27, 2025, Turner filed a “Motion for Credit for Time Spent in Custody.” In both
filings, Turner sought jail-time credit from May 20, 2018, through July 19, 2018, which he
calculated as fifty-nine days.1 Turner’s February 13, 2025 request also sought an additional
115 days of credit, which he claimed was the amount of time he was jailed pending trial on
the new charges in case No. 10CR-24-49. The State responded to Turner’s March 27 motion,
and the circuit court denied the motion in an order entered on May 27. On June 17, Turner
filed a notice of appeal, which designated the Clark County Circuit Court’s May order.
1
This is the period of time that Turner claimed to have spent in pretrial detention before pleading guilty and being sentenced in the original case, 10CR-18-82.
2
II. Discussion
Turner claims that he is entitled to jail-time credit pursuant to Arkansas Code
Annotated section 5-4-404, which provides that “[i]f a defendant is held in custody for
conduct that results in a sentence to imprisonment . . . the court . . . shall credit the time
spent in custody against the sentence, including time spent in a local jail facility awaiting
transfer to the Division of Correction.” Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-404 (Repl. 2024). Because
the circuit court lacked jurisdiction when it denied Turner’s untimely posttrial motion to
this effect, and Turner failed to timely appeal from the deemed denial of his motion, we
dismiss.
Rule 33.3 governs posttrial motions and allows a person convicted of a felony or
misdemeanor to file a motion for new trial or other relief within thirty days after the entry
of judgment. Ark. R. Crim. P. 33.3(b). If a request for jail-time credit is raised in the circuit
court as part of the original proceeding or in a posttrial motion, we may review it on direct
appeal. See, e.g., Burgess v. State, 2016 Ark. 175, 490 S.W.3d 645; Polston v. State, 2020 Ark.
App. 530; Weatherford v. State, 2019 Ark. App. 536, 590 S.W.3d 172.2 If such request is not
ruled on within thirty days, however, it is deemed denied and must be appealed within thirty
days of the deemed denial. Ark. R. Crim. P. 33.3(c). A circuit court that purports to rule
2
When not raised in the original proceeding or a posttrial motion, a request for jailtime credit is considered a request for modification of a sentence imposed in an illegal manner pursuant to Rule 37. See, e.g., Cooley v. State, 322 Ark. 348, 909 S.W.2d 312 (1995); Weatherford, 2019 Ark. App. 536, 590 S.W.3d 172.
3
on such a motion more than thirty days after its filing therefore lacks subject-matter
jurisdiction to do so. Mallett v. State, 2021 Ark. App. 76, at 3 n.4.
Rule 33.3(c) states that a posttrial motion “shall be deemed denied as of the 30th day.”
State v. Boyette, 362 Ark. 27, 32, 207 S.W.3d 488, 492 (2005). A circuit court’s subsequent
ruling on any such motion does not extend an appellant’s timeline for filing an appeal
because the court lacks jurisdiction. Id. at 33, 207 S.W.3d at 493. Absent a timely notice of
appeal, we lack jurisdiction to consider the appeal and must dismiss. Mallett, 2021 Ark. App.
76, at 6.
We addressed a similar situation in Mallett, where the appellant filed an untimely
motion for reconsideration of jail-time credit more than thirty days after the judgment and
disposition order. 2021 Ark. App. 76, at 6. We stated that “[b]ecause the circuit court lacked
jurisdiction to consider Mallett’s motion for reconsideration, his amended notice of appeal
of the ‘deemed denial’ of the motion had no effect and could not vest this court with
jurisdiction.” Id. at 6 n.4. Similarly, in Boyette, the Arkansas Supreme Court held that,
because Rule 33.3(c) is mandatory and requires that posttrial motions “shall be deemed
denied as of the 30th day after filing,” the circuit court lost jurisdiction by its failure to rule
within thirty days and therefore did not have authority to act when it ruled on the posttrial
motion. 362 Ark. at 32, 207 S.W.3d at 492.
Here, the court entered a sentencing order on January 14. It appears that Turner
attempted to mount a challenge in his February 13 request, but it was not served on the State
4
or ruled on by the circuit court. Turner then filed a March 27 motion3 more than two
months after the sentencing order was entered, which was clearly outside the window for
timely posttrial motions pursuant to Rule 33.3. Moreover, even a timely motion would have
been deemed denied after thirty days, and the circuit court was without jurisdiction to issue
its denial of the March 27 motion on May 27. Just as in Boyette, the circuit court here lost
jurisdiction by its failure to rule within thirty days and did not have authority to act when it
ruled on the posttrial motion. Turner also failed to file a timely appeal from any deemed
denial.
For each of these reasons, we must dismiss.
Dismissed.
WOOD and BROWN, JJ., agree.
Corey Turner, pro se appellant.
Tim Griffin, Att’y Gen., by: David L. Eanes, Jr., Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.
3
Turner’s March 27 motion requests an “order Nunc pro Tunc,” and Turner argues in his brief that he “changed his plea to a plea of guilty with the understanding that he would receive all of his jail time credit toward his 60 month sentence.” To the extent Turner argues that his guilty plea was negotiated because he understood he would receive the jail-time credit that he now requests, his appeal would likewise be dismissed. See Burgess, 2016 Ark. 175, at 4, 490 S.W.3d at 648; see also Nelson v. State, 2012 Ark. 217.
5