{"disclaimer":"This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"antwain-cedrick-stewart","displayName":"Antwain Cedrick Stewart","totalCases":1},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappwd:wd81309:2019-04-09","opinionId":"a0f886f8-9914-5537-9ac8-b5833851b1b3","slug":"antwain-cedrick-stewart-v-state-of-missouri-d81309","caseName":"Antwain Cedrick Stewart\nvs.\nState of Missouri","caseNumber":"WD81309","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":"2019-04-09","year":2019,"display_summary":"Antwain Stewart appealed the denial of his pro se post-conviction motion under Rule 29.15, arguing that the motion court erred by accepting his appointed counsel's statement in lieu of an amended motion. Stewart contended that his pro se motion was facially defective, rendering counsel's statement tantamount to abandonment. The Western District affirmed the motion court's judgment, finding that counsel complied with Rule 29.15(e) by investigating and determining there were no additional meritorious claims, and Stewart failed to demonstrate prejudice or abandonment.","primaryTopic":"criminal-procedure","topicSlugs":["criminal-procedure","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=138794","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/antwain-cedrick-stewart-v-state-of-missouri-d81309","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":36,"source":"tag","evidence":["tag: criminal-law","topic: criminal-procedure","text: state of missouri","text: conviction"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: appellate-procedure"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"appellant"}]}