Legal Opinion

CRAIG A. HILL, Movant-Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent-Respondent.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided June 23, 2016No. SD34092PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNancy Steffen Rahmeyer,J.

—Opinion Author

Craig A. Hill (“Movant”) appeals the motion court’s denial without an evi-dentiary hearing of his request for post-conviction relief under Rule 24.035, Missouri Court Rules (2016). In a single point relied on, Movant asserts that the motion court “clearly erred in denying [Movant] an evidentiary hearing” on his claim that plea counsel “was ineffective for failing to request a mental evaluation” of Movant. Movant and the State now agree that Mov-ant’s amended motion for post-conviction relief was filed after the time permitted by Rule 24.035(g), and request that the case be…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Charles K. Moore v. State of MissouriSupreme Court of Missouri · 2015
  2. JONATHAN JAMES PRICE, Movant-Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent-RespondentMissouri Court of Appeals · 2016

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. BILLIE J. BORSCHNACK, Movant-Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent-RespondentMissouri Court of Appeals · 2020
  2. ERIC JERONE WILLIAMS, Movant-Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent-Respondent.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API