Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Supreme Court of Missouri· 5/3/1991

Thomas v. State

Citations

  • 808 S.W.2d 364
  • 1991 Mo. LEXIS 55
  • 1991 WL 70122

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that Rule 51.05 permitting a change of judge in a civil action does not apply to post-conviction motions for relief because, in part, the rule would build “in the very delay Rules 24.035 and 29.15 are designed to eliminate”
  • holding that Rule 51.05 permitting a change of judge in a civil action does not apply to post-conviction motions for relief because, in part, the rule would build \in the very delay Rules 24.035 and 29.15 are designed to eliminate\
  • holding that Rule 51.05 permitting a change of judge in a civil action does not apply to post-conviction motions for relief because, in part, the rule would build “in the very delay Rules 24.035 and 29.15 are designed to eliminate”
  • “The trial judge is … better equipped to assess defense counsel’s performance within the context of the entire case and to measure the impact of that performance on the outcome of the trial as required” by Strickland. (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Robertson, Blackmar, Higgins, Covington, Holstein, Maus, Rendlen, Billings

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

65 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

9 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.