Clay v. Dormire

I

I respectfully dissent. Rule 91 provides that habeas corpus relief is available to any person restrained of his liberty within this state.1 The majority concludes that since Mr. Clay failed to raise the expungement issue in his direct appeal or his subsequent post-conviction relief motion filed under Rule 29.15 that his petition is proee-durally barred.2 However, this Court has held that “[ijnasmuch as habeas corpus jurisdiction springs from the constitution, it may not be eliminated by statute or rule.”3 Procedural default in remedies previously available may provide the basis for denying a…