From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wade v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE
Apr 21, 1998
966 S.W.2d 408 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998)

Opinion

No. 72780

OPINION FILED: April 21, 1998

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis City; John J. Riley, Judge.

Susan L. Hogan, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Karen L. Kramer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before Grimm, P.J., Pudlowski and Gaertner, J.J.



ORDER


James Wade, Movant, appeals the judgment dismissing his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief as untimely. Movant concedes that his Rule 24.035 motion was untimely in that he did not file it within 90 days after he was delivered to the Missouri Department of Corrections. However, he challenges the constitutionality of Rule 24.035 time requirements. The Missouri Supreme Court has held that the time limits in Rule 24.035 are constitutional and mandatory. Day v. State, 770 S.W.2d 692, 695 (Mo. banc 1989), cert. denied sub nom. Walker v. Missouri, 493 U.S. 866, 110 S.Ct. 186, 107 L.Ed.2d 141 (1989).

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court's determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k); State v. Blankenship, 830 S.W.2d 1, 16 (Mo. banc 1992). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Wade v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE
Apr 21, 1998
966 S.W.2d 408 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998)
Case details for

Wade v. State

Case Details

Full title:JAMES IRVIN WADE, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF MISSOURI, RESPONDENT

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE

Date published: Apr 21, 1998

Citations

966 S.W.2d 408 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998)