Legal Opinion

Barkwell v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided July 20, 1981No. 11994PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BILLINGS, Judge.

Nelson Eugene Barkwell was denied post-conviction relief, under Rule 27.26, V.A. M.R., from consecutive sentences for stealing and filed this appeal. The trial court found that he was not prejudiced by his trial attorney’s failure to timely file his motion for new trial. We affirm.

*512Movant alleged he had ineffective assistance of counsel because the motion for new trial was late and on direct appeal [State v. Barkwell, 590 S.W.2d 93 (Mo.App.1979)] we refused to review his “most meritorious point.”

In movant’s direct appeal three points were set forth. Even though the motion for…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Seales v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1979
  2. State v. BarkwellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1979

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Shaw v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. State v. JohnsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1982
  3. Curtis v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988
  4. State v. BatekMissouri Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. Green v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API