Austin v. State

Introduction

Daniel Austin (“Austin”) appeals the motion .court’s judgment denying his Rule 24.0351 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We cannot determine from the record on appeal whether Austin’s amended motion was timely filed by appointed counsel. Nor can we determine from the record if the motion court made an independent inquiry as to whether the amended motion was timely filed and if Austin was abandoned by appointed counsel. We reverse and remand this matter to the motion court to determine the timeliness of the amended motion and the issue of abandonment.