Hopkins v. State, 519 S.W.3d 433

Movant (Stewart Hopkins) was convicted of first-degree murder and armed criminal action for killing his ex-wife; sentenced to life without parole and 25 years; convictions affirmed on direct appeal.
Movant gave a detailed inculpatory police statement and DNA evidence linked his knife to the victim; jail phone calls with inculpatory statements were played at trial.
Movant filed a timely pro se Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion; the court issued an Order of Notification to the State Public Defender on August 18, 2014.
Public defender entered an appearance on September 26, 2014; counsel filed an amended motion on December 26, 2014 (did not adopt the pro se claims); movant waived an evidentiary hearing.
Amended motion alleged trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to the recorded jail phone calls (argued as improper evidence of incarceration/criminal propensity); motion court denied relief as movant failed to show prejudice given overwhelming evidence of guilt.

Issue	Movant's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether the court’s August 18 notification to the State Public Defender constituted an appointment triggering Rule 29.15(g) timelines	Notification was effectively appointment so amended motion might be untimely if counted from that date	Notification was not an appointment; timelines begin on counsel’s entry of appearance	Notification was not an appointment; amended motion was timely because filed within 90 days of counsel’s entry of appearance
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to object to jail phone call evidence	Hopkins: calls referenced incarceration/criminal history and were prejudicial propensity evidence; counsel should have objected	State: even if objectionable, evidence of guilt was overwhelming (confession, DNA), so no prejudice	Court assumed arguendo deficiency but found no prejudice; denied ineffective-assistance claim

Moore v. State, 458 S.W.3d 822 (Mo. banc 2015) (standard for remand and abandonment inquiry when counsel fails to file timely amended motion)
Hoeber v. State, 488 S.W.3d 648 (Mo. banc 2016) (ineffective-assistance two-prong standard and prejudice definition)
Dorsey v. State, 448 S.W.3d 276 (Mo. banc 2014) (ineffective-assistance framework explicated)
Williams v. State, 168 S.W.3d 433 (Mo. banc 2005) (clear-error standard for post-conviction findings)
State v. Creighton, 520 S.W.3d 416 (Mo. banc 2017) (holding that mere notification to public defender is not an appointment; timelines begin on counsel’s appearance)