Klapesky v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to hold a hearing on timely filed motion for new trial where defendant presented his supporting affidavit thirty-one days after his sentence was imposed
• “Filing affidavits in support of a motion for new trial more than [thirty] days after sentencing is considered an untimely attempt to amend the motion.”
• \A motion for new trial alleging facts outside the record without supporting affidavits is not a proper pleading and is defective . . . .\
• \A motion for new trial alleging facts outside the record without supporting affidavits is not a proper pleading and is defective . . . .\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).