#MAYA ZAPATA PRO#
The amended motion added two new claims to the four claims contained in Movant s pro se 2 motion, and expanded the facts alleged to support the claims from two pages in Movant s pro se motion to twenty-one pages less a small amount of legal authority and argument in the amended motion. Motion counsel filed suggestions in opposition to the State s request on May 7, 2012, and subsequently filed an amended motion for post-conviction relief on May 29, 2012. On April 27, 2012, the State requested that the motion court proceed on pro se motion, and filed proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, noting that no Amended Motion has been filed and it is now time barred. Motion counsel did not file an amended motion, even within the extra time requested, but did undertake discovery. The motion court never ruled on motion counsel s application for an extension of time to file an amended motion.
That same day, motion counsel filed an application for an extension of thirty days in which to file an amended motion pursuant to Rule 29.15(g). Retained motion counsel entered an appearance on behalf of Movant on September 19, 2011. In an order filed on August 10, 2011, the motion court appointed the State public defender to represent Movant in this 24.035 action, and the amended motion is due sixty days from either the date of this order or the date the guilty plea and sentencing transcript is filed in the circuit court, whichever is later. On August 1, 2011, Movant timely filed a pro se motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 29.15.
#MAYA ZAPATA TRIAL#
Movant appealed, and we affirmed the trial court s judgment in an unpublished, per curiam order and memorandum. 1 Procedural History Following a trial to the court, Movant was convicted of statutory sodomy in the first degree of a child who was less than twelve at the time ( Victim ), acquitted of sexual exploitation of Victim, and sentenced to twelve years in the Department of Corrections. 1 All references to rules are to Missouri Court Rules (2013). If so, the motion court then should resolve Movant s post-conviction relief proceeding in accordance with Rule 29.15 on the basis of the amended motion.
Moody, Special Judge REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS Maya Zapata Gasa ( Movant ) appeals from the denial without an evidentiary hearing of her original pro se motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 29.15.1 We reverse and remand for the motion court to determine whether Movant s motion counsel abandoned Movant with the result that an amended motion filed by motion counsel should be treated as filed timely. SD32433 Filed: NovemAPPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CHRISTIAN COUNTY Honorable John G. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent-Respondent.
0 kommentar(er)
