Nicholas Goetz v. State of Missouri, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1190

Movant Nicholas Goetz was convicted by a jury of first-degree child molestation and sentenced to eight years' imprisonment; conviction was affirmed on direct appeal.
Movant filed a timely pro se Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion; counsel was appointed and filed a timely amended motion.
The amended motion raised two ineffective-assistance claims: (1) trial counsel failed to advise Movant of the risk of receiving an eight-year sentence if convicted at trial; (2) counsel failed to object to the sentence as improperly based on Movant’s lack of remorse and his exercise of the right to proceed to trial.
The motion court entered a written denial without an evidentiary hearing but discussed and adjudicated only the first claim, finding it refuted by the record and Movant’s allegations to be self-serving and meritless.
The court did not mention, discuss, or dispose of the second ineffective-assistance claim at all.
After Goetz appealed, the Missouri Supreme Court decided Green v. State, which holds that a post-conviction judgment that fails to dispose of all claims is not final and requires dismissal of an appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the motion court’s denial was final when it adjudicated only some claims in the Rule 29.15 motion	Goetz argued the court failed to adjudicate his second ineffective-assistance claim, so the judgment is not final	State argued the motion was denied and no relief was warranted; implicitly treated denial as final	Court held the judgment was not final because it failed to address one claim; appeal dismissed under Green

Green v. State, 494 S.W.3d 525 (Mo. banc 2016) (a post-conviction judgment that does not acknowledge or dispose of all claims is not final)
Skillicorn v. State, 22 S.W.3d 678 (Mo. banc 2000) (Rule 75.01 is inapplicable to preserve error in post-conviction proceedings)