Leigh v. State
551 S.W.3d 76
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2018Background
- Christopher D. Leigh pleaded guilty to four counts of aggravated stalking and was sentenced to four consecutive four-year terms (16 years), with execution suspended and five years probation.
- Leigh violated probation and was ordered to a court-ordered 120-day DOC program under §559.036; he was delivered to DOC on December 19, 2016, completed the program, was released to probation, and later returned to DOC when probation was revoked.
- Leigh filed a pro se Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief on April 28, 2017, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, duress in pleading, and innocence; counsel was appointed but did not file an amended motion before dismissal.
- The motion court dismissed Leigh’s Rule 24.035 motion on May 23, 2017, reasoning it challenged a probation condition/court-ordered detention rather than the underlying convictions and sentences and thus was not cognizable under Rule 24.035.
- On appeal, the State conceded Leigh’s point; the appellate court found the motion challenged the underlying convictions and was filed within the 180-day period measured from the date Leigh was delivered to DOC (December 19, 2016).
- The appellate court reversed the dismissal, remanded for merits consideration, and instructed the motion court to permit Leigh 60 days from mandate to file an amended motion per Rule 24.035(g).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Leigh’s Rule 24.035 motion was timely and cognizable where he was delivered to DOC for a 120‑day program before return to DOC on revocation | Leigh: Motion filed April 28, 2017 is within 180 days of DOC delivery (Dec. 19, 2016) and challenges underlying convictions/sentences | State/Motion court: Delivery to DOC was a court‑ordered detention sanction tied to probation conditions, not the underlying sentence, so motion is not within Rule 24.035 scope or is untimely | Court held Leigh’s motion challenged convictions/sentences and was timely under Rule 24.035(b) (180 days from DOC delivery); reversed dismissal and remanded for merits, allowing 60 days to amend |
Key Cases Cited
- Edwards v. State, 484 S.W.3d 847 (Mo. App. E.D. 2016) (180‑day Rule 24.035 period begins when defendant is delivered to DOC for a 120‑day program)
- Swallow v. State, 398 S.W.3d 1 (Mo. banc 2013) (Rule 24.035 provides prompt review of defects in judgment or sentence)
- Stanley v. State, 420 S.W.3d 532 (Mo. banc 2014) (standard for when findings are clearly erroneous)
- Hall v. State, 528 S.W.3d 360 (Mo. banc 2017) (appellate review standard for Rule 24.035 dispositions)
- Simmons v. State, 432 S.W.3d 306 (Mo. App. E.D. 2014) (presumption of correctness for motion court findings)
- Hall v. State, 380 S.W.3d 583 (Mo. App. E.D. 2012) (time restrictions in Rule 24.035 are mandatory and strictly enforced)