Legal Opinion

Staten v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided March 6, 2018No. WD 80303PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VICTOR C. HOWARD, JUDGE

*874Walter Staten appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 24.035 motion for postconviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. The record suggests that Staten's amended motion for postconviction relief was untimely filed. Because the motion court did not make an independent inquiry into whether Staten was abandoned by postconviction counsel as a result of the untimely filing, this court reverses the motion court's judgment and remands the case for determination of whether Staten was abandoned by postconviction counsel.

Background

Staten was charged…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Charles K. Moore v. State of MissouriSupreme Court of Missouri · 2015
  2. Lawrence Frazee v. State of MissouriMissouri Court of Appeals · 2016

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Baker v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2018
  2. BILLIE J. BORSCHNACK, Movant-Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent-RespondentMissouri Court of Appeals · 2020
  3. Shania A. Harness v. State of MissouriMissouri Court of Appeals · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API