Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 05-27-2021
Case Style:
Lamont Campbell v. State of Missouri
Case Number: ED108624
Judge: Robert M. Clayton III
Court: MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS EASTERN DISTRICT
Plaintiff's Attorney: Eric Schmitt, Shaun J. Mackelprang
Defendant's Attorney:
Description:
St. Louis, Missouri - Criminal defense attorney represented Lamont Campbell with first-degree murder (Count I) and armed criminal action (Count II) charges.
After a jury trial, Appellant was found guilty of first-degree murder (Count I) and armed
criminal action (Count II). The trial court entered a judgment in accordance with the jury’s
verdicts. The court sentenced Appellant to life imprisonment with eligibility for parole for
Count I and to twenty years of imprisonment for Count II, with the sentences to run concurrently.
1 All references to Rule 29.15 are to the version of Missouri Supreme Court Rule 29.15 effective from January 1,
2018 to the present.
2 All references to Rule 30.03 are to the version of Missouri Supreme Court Rule 30.03 effective from January 1,
1980 to the present. Rule 30.03, which is set out in full in Section II. of this opinion, allows a defendant or the state
having the right of appeal to seek leave to file a notice of appeal out of time within twelve months after a judgment
becomes final. See Rule 30.03. 2
This Court affirmed Appellant’s convictions and sentences on direct appeal in State v.
Campbell, 558 S.W.3d 554, 556-64 (Mo. App. E.D. 2018). The mandate was issued on
September 13, 2018. Thus, Missouri Supreme Court Rule 29.15(b) required Appellant to file his
motion for post-conviction relief by December 12, 2018.
3
More than six months later, on July 1,
2019, Appellant filed his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief.
4
Appellant’s Rule 29.15 motion did not allege any facts showing the untimely filing
should be excused. Appellant’s motion also included a completed forma pauperis affidavit
containing Appellant’s notarized signature. The motion court did not subsequently appoint postconviction counsel for Appellant. On August 6, 2019, the motion court entered a judgment
dismissing Appellant’s Rule 29.15 motion as untimely filed.
Thereafter, Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal on December 27, 2019. Appellant’s
notice of appeal was accompanied by a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
On January 21, 2020, the Clerk’s Office of this Court advised Appellant by letter that his
notice of appeal “was not complete.” The letter specifically advised Appellant the Missouri
Supreme Court had adopted new forms that were effective January 1, 2017, and the letter
directed Appellant to “[p]lease fill out the [n]ew [n]otice of [a]ppeal [f]orms and [r]eturn to this
office by February 5, 2020.” On February 3, 2020, Appellant, acting pro se, filed the correct
notice of appeal forms with Clerk’s Office of this Court. An attorney with the Missouri State
3 Missouri Supreme Court Rule 29.15(b) provides that if a movant, like Appellant, files a direct appeal and an
appellate court affirms his convictions and sentences, his motion for post-conviction relief “shall be filed within 90
days after the date the mandate of the appellate court issues . . ..” In this case, 90 days from September 13, 2018
was Wednesday, December 12, 2018.
4 On November 26, 2018, the Circuit Clerk’s Office for the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis (“Circuit Clerk’s
Office”) file stamped a pro se pleading from Appellant dated November 20, 2018. In this pleading, Appellant
requested “a time extension to submit [his] Form 40/29[.]15 [motion] due to the fact” Appellant was allegedly “in
the hole (administrative segregation)” and did not “have access to [his] legal documents/Form 40/29[.]15
paperwork” since November 10, 2018; Appellant alleged he had “requested the prison staff to give” him his legal
paperwork but that “they [had] refused”; and Appellant asked for the Circuit Clerk’s Office to mail him a blank
Form 40 “just in case [he] need[ed] to fill it out and file it again.” Subsequently, Appellant sent his Rule 29.15
motion to the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, and the motion was filed stamped by the Circuit Clerk’s Office
on July 1, 2019. 3
Public Defender’s Office entered her appearance for Appellant on July 13, 2020. Oral argument
and submission of this appeal followed.
II. DISCUSSION
Post-conviction motions filed pursuant to Rule 29.15 are “governed by the [Missouri
Supreme Court] [Rules of [C]ivil [P]rocedure insofar as applicable.” Rule 29.15(a). Generally,
a notice of appeal must be filed “not later than ten days after the judgment . . . becomes final.”
See Rule 81.04(a);5
see also section 512.050 RSMo 2016; Twitty v. State, 322 S.W.3d 608, 609
(Mo. App. E.D. 2010); but see Rule 30.03 (allowing a defendant or the State having the right of
appeal to seek leave to file a notice of appeal out of time within twelve months after a judgment
becomes final). “A judgment becomes final at the expiration of thirty days after its entry if no
timely authorized after-trial motion is filed.” Rule 81.05(a)(1);6
see also Twitty, 322 S.W.3d at
609. When computing any time prescribed under the Missouri Supreme Court Rules of Civil
Procedure, the day of the judgment is not included, but “[t]he last day of the period so computed
is to be included, unless it is a Saturday, Sunday or a legal holiday, in which event the period
runs until the end of the next day which is neither a Saturday, Sunday nor legal holiday.” Rule
44.01(a);7
see also Twitty, 322 S.W.3d at 609-10.
“The Missouri Supreme Court has found that the burden placed on a movant to ascertain
whether a proper notice of appeal is timely filed is not an unreasonable one.” Twitty, 322
S.W.3d at 610 (citing Gehrke v. State, 280 S.W.3d 54, 58 (Mo. banc 2009)). “The time limits for
filing a notice of appeal are mandatory.” Twitty, 322 S.W.3d at 610. Accordingly, if a notice of
appeal is untimely filed, our Court may dismiss the appeal. Id.
5 All references to Rule 81.04 are to the version of Missouri Supreme Court Rule 81.04 effective from January 1,
2017 to the present.
6 All references to Rule 81.05 are to the version of Missouri Supreme Court Rule 81.05 effective from January 1,
2000 to the present.
7 All references to Rule 44.01 are to the version of Missouri Supreme Court Rule 44.01 effective from July 1, 2013
to the present. 4
Rule 30.03 allows a defendant or the State having the right of appeal to seek leave to file
a notice of appeal out of time within twelve months after a judgment becomes final. See Rule
30.03. The Rule, titled “Notice of Appeal Filed Out of Time – Special Order of Appellate
Court,” specifically provides in full that:
Where the defendant or the state has the right of appeal including appeals from an
order in a post-conviction proceeding involving a prior felony conviction, but
notice of appeal is not filed with the clerk of the trial court within ten days after
the judgment becomes final, the defendant or the state may file a notice of appeal
in the trial court if, within twelve months after the judgment becomes final, a
motion for leave to file such notice is filed in the appropriate appellate court and
it thereafter sustains the motion and grants such leave.
Such special order may be made by the appellate court, in its discretion, for good
cause shown. The order shall specify the time within which the notice of appeal is
to be filed in the trial court.
Id. (emphasis added).
“In the absence of any request to [an appellate] court for a special order to appeal under
Rule 30.03, the untimeliness of the filing of a notice of appeal is a jurisdictional defect.” Fuller
v. State, 485 S.W.3d 768, 771 (Mo. App. W.D. 2016) ((quoting McAnulty v. State, 755 S.W.2d
24, 24 (Mo. App. S.D. 1988) (citing Goldberg v. Mos, 631 S.W.2d 342, 345 (Mo. 1982)).
Moreover, “[an appellate court] ‘may not enlarge the period for taking an appeal as provided by’
Rule 30.03.” Fuller, 485 S.W.3d at 771 (quoting Missouri Supreme Court Rule 20.01(b)).8
In this case, Appellant appeals from a judgment entered on August 6, 2019. The
judgment became final thirty days later, on September 5, 2019. See Rule 81.05(a)(1); see also
Twitty, 322 S.W.3d at 609. Because ten days from when the judgment became final on
September 5, 2019 fell on Sunday, September 15, 2019, Appellant was required to file his notice
of appeal by Monday, September 16, 2019. See Rule 81.04(a); Rule 44.01(a); see also section
512.050 RSMo 2016; Twitty, 322 S.W.3d at 609. However, Appellant did not file a notice of
8 All references to Rule 20.01 are to the version of Missouri Supreme Court Rule 20.01 effective from January 1,
1980 to the present. 5
appeal until December 27, 2019, more than three months after the deadline. Although Rule
30.03 allowed Appellant to seek leave to file a notice of appeal out of time, Appellant did not file
any such request. See Rule 30.03.
Because Appellant’s notice of appeal was untimely filed and because Appellant has failed
to request this Court for a special order to file a notice of appeal out of time under Rule 30.03,
we dismiss his appeal.9
See Fuller, 485 S.W.3d at 771; Twitty, 322 S.W.3d at 610 (dismissing an
appeal under similar circumstances); see also McAnulty, 755 S.W.2d at 24 (citing Goldberg, 631
S.W.2d at 345); Rule 20.01(b).
Outcome: Based on the foregoing, Appellant’s appeal is dismissed.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: