Skip to main content

Edwards v. State

Citations

  • 514 S.W.3d 68
  • 2017 WL 1056215
  • 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 197

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • rejecting movant’s similar argument that the facts “established] abandonment on the face of the record without the need for remand”
  • “A court may extend the 60–day deadline only one time, by no more than 30 days, if a timely motion for extension of time is filed and granted.”
  • “[A] court should calculate the date an amended motion is due using a two-step process, counting [sixty] days from the date of appointment . . ., and then [thirty] days from the date the motion is initially due.”
  • “[A] court should calculate the date an amended motion is due using a two-step process, counting 60 days from the date of appointment or entry of appearance, and then 30 days from the date the motion is initially due.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Dolan, Richter, Sullivan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.