Hicks v. State

921 S.W.2d 157, 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 803, 1996 WL 227519
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Hicks v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 521
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 7, 1996·No. No. 68652·Published

Opinion

[158]*158 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Douglas R. Hicks appeals dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion. On November 23, 1993, movant was delivered to the Missouri Department of Corrections to serve a seven year sentence for delivery of a controlled substance, § 195.211 RSMo Cum.Supp.1989. On February 27, 1995, movant filed a pro se Rule 24.035 motion.

The motion court dismissed the motion as untimely under Rule 24.035(b). The rule allows ninety days after delivery to the custody of the Department of Corrections to file a motion for post conviction relief. Dismissal of the late filed motion was mandatory. “The time limitations contained in Rules 21.035 and 29.15 are valid and mandatory.” Day v. State, 770 S.W.2d 692, 695 (Mo. banc 1989). The dismissal is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hicks v. State, 921 S.W.2d 157, 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 803, 1996 WL 227519 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996).

921 S.W.2d 157 (Hicks v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Day v. State
770 S.W.2d 692 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1989)