Legal Opinion

Mills v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 23, 1986No. 51443PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CRIST, Judge.

Movant appeals the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion without an evidentiary hearing and without notice to movant’s lawyer. We reverse and remand due to lack of prior notice to movant’s lawyer of the date of entry of the Rule 27.26 judgment.

On June 17, 1985, movant filed a pro se Rule 27.26 motion. On June 26, 1985, a lawyer was appointed to represent him. On July 25, 1985, the Rule 27.26 trial court notified the lawyers unless an amended motion was filed on or before August 30, 1985, the court would rule on the merits of the pro se motion shortly thereafter. After several requests…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Wheatley v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1977
  2. Riley v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. Walker v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1985

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Chatman v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. Young v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. Luster v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. Loewe v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989
  5. Mills v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988

6 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