Defendant was convicted for driving while intoxicated and for driving while his license was revoked. Defendant filed a petition for post-conviction relief, arguing that appellate counsel failed to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions Where the state ...

Tagged with: Failure to Challenge Sufficiency of Evidence Post-Conviction Relief

Where a defendant argued that the motion court erred in denying his motion for post-conviction relief because his counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to sever other counts of statutory sodomy of which he was acquitted, counsel ...

Tagged with: effectiveness of counsel Post-Conviction Relief Severance

CWhere a defendant who was determined to be indigent by the motion court challenged the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief without the appointment of counsel, the judgment is reversed and remanded because the appointment of counsel for indigent ...

Tagged with: Appointment Of Counsel Indigent Defendant Post-Conviction Relief

Where a defendant challenged the denial of post-conviction relief, the motion was due within 180 days of the defendant’s delivery to serve his sentence, so the pro se motion was untimely and is remanded for dismissal. Remanded. Marks v. State ...

Tagged with: Post-Conviction Relief timeliness

Where a defendant who sought to vacate his guilty plea challenged the denial of post-conviction relief, the case is reversed and remanded in part because the motion court erred by denying the Rule 24.035 motion because the defendant pleaded facts ...

Tagged with: conflict of interest effectiveness of counsel Post-Conviction Relief

Where defendant challenged the effectiveness of counsel, arguing that his attorney failed to make an offer of proof regarding the victim’s alleged gang membership and drug dealing, the motion court did not err in denying post-conviction relief because the evidence ...

Tagged with: Alternate Perpetrator Evidence effectiveness of counsel Post-Conviction Relief

Where defendant challenged the dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion, arguing that the motion court improperly invoked the escape rule without ruling on the merits of his claims and thus violating his constitutional rights, judicial authority has established that application ...

Tagged with: Escape Rule Post-Conviction Relief

Where a defendant challenged the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion, arguing that his failure to timely file was the result of third-party interference by his counsel on direct appeal when counsel inaccurately informed him of the deadline, the failure ...

Tagged with: Post-Conviction Relief Third-Party Interference timeliness

Where a defendant challenged the denial of his pro se motion to set aside his conviction for receiving stolen property, the judgment is affirmed because the amended motion was timely filed and effectual even though it did not include every ...

Tagged with: Abandonment Post-Conviction Relief

Where a defendant challenged the denial of post-conviction relief after his guilty plea, the trial court did not err in denying the motion because the plea counsel had no duty to advise him of the deportation consequences of the plea, ...

Tagged with: Deportation Consequences Guilty Plea Post-Conviction Relief

Where a defendant challenged the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court did not err in entering  a 2016 guilty plea on one count of class D felony violation of an order of protection ...

Tagged with: Miranda Post-Conviction Relief