Pabst v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting a claim of manifest injustice both because the movant “failed to explain the delay” in filing an amended motion under 60-1507 and on the merits of his claim
• discussing time limits for K.S.A. 60-1507 actions when conviction occurred before 2003 statutory amendments
• \[The language of Kansas Supreme Court Rule 183] calls for specificity in the manner in which the movant claims ineffective assistance of counsel.\
• individuals with K.S.A. 60-1507 claims preexisting the 2003 statutory amendment had until June 30, 2004, to file such a motion
• \An amendment to a motion for relief under K.S.A. 60-1507 that asserts a new ground for relief which is supported by facts that differ in both time and type from those grounds set forth in the original motion does not relate back to the date of the original motion.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).