McKay v. State

Summary

The Missouri Supreme Court held that a post-conviction motion filed before the judgment of conviction was finally affirmed was premature, not successive. Because the appellate court had remanded the speedy-trial issue while affirming other issues, the defendant’s later motion addressing that issue was timely and should be treated as a supplement to the premature initial motion. The Court vacated the dismissal and directed the motion court to permit counsel to file a single amended motion addressing all claims.

Holdings

1. A post-conviction motion filed before the mandate affirming the entire judgment of conviction is issued is premature because the judgment is not yet final and subject to collateral attack.
2. When the initial post-conviction motion was filed prematurely, a motion filed after the entire conviction is affirmed is not successive; it should be treated as a timely supplement to the premature initial motion.
3. The motion court must treat the premature and timely pro se motions as a single motion and allow appointed counsel to file one amended motion addressing all claims, including claims previously ruled upon.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion filed before the judgment of conviction is finally affirmed is premature.
2. Whether a later post-conviction motion is successive when the earlier motion was prematurely filed before resolution of a remanded claim.
3. What remedy applies when a premature post-conviction motion was improperly decided on the merits and a later timely motion was dismissed as successive.

Disposition

vacated