Legal Opinion

Moore v. State

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided November 19, 1996No. 78691, 78694PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROBERTSON, Judge.

Luleff v. State, 807 S.W.2d 495 (Mo. banc 1991), and Sanders v. State, 807 S.W.2d 493 (Mo. banc 1991), extend the time limitations for filing an amended Rule 29.15 1 motion where post-conviction counsel abandons the movant. McDaris v. State, 843 S.W.2d 369 (Mo. banc 1992), requires the trial court to make inquiry “as part of its independent inquiry under Luleff” to ensure that movant is informed of post-conviction counsel’s response when post-conviction counsel abandons movant. We granted transfer in these consolidated cases to assure motion courts that McDaris does not…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Luleff v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1991
  2. Sanders v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1991
  3. McDaris v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1992
  4. State Ex Rel. Public Defender Commission v. BonackerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1986

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Charles K. Moore v. State of MissouriSupreme Court of Missouri · 2015
  2. Glennon Paul Sweet v. Paul Delo, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional CenterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1997
  3. Barnett v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2003
  4. Travis M. Stanley v. State of MissouriSupreme Court of Missouri · 2014
  5. Mark D. Vogl v. State of MissouriSupreme Court of Missouri · 2014

38 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