Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Nixon v. Sheffield

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided September 30, 2008No. 28941PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DANIEL E. SCOTT, Presiding Judge.

After Clayton Price lost his criminal appeal, his lawyer was to file and handle a Rule 29.15 1 motion for post-conviction relief (PCR), but missed the filing deadline. Price later sought relief by ha-beas corpus, which Respondent Sheffield 2 granted, purporting to vacate the conviction and remand the case for retrial. We granted certiorari to determine if Respondent thereby exceeded her authority. 3

Background

A Taney County jury found Price guilty of sodomizing his fíancée’s six-year-old daughter. After Price’s trial counsel filed the new trial motion, he…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Schlup v. DeloSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  3. Murray v. CarrierSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. United States v. FradySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. State v. HunterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1992

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Price v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2014
  2. Hutton v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2011
  3. Clayton Dean Price v. State of MissouriSupreme Court of Missouri · 2014
  4. Marshall v. LewisDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 2021
  5. Marshall v. LewisDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 2021

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API