Ott Law Firm Agent-Safe Plain Text
Official source remains authoritative.

Case: Brenda S. Kidd, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District
Decision Date: Unknown
Outcome: affirmed
Practice Area: criminal-law
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/brenda-s-kidd-appellant-v-state-of-missouri-respondent-18603
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=18603
Related Practice Areas:
- Criminal Law: https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law?ott_archive=missouri-courts&ott_archive_practice_area=criminal-law&ott_archive_query=Brenda+S.+Kidd%2C+Appellant%2C+v.+State+of+Missouri%2C+Respondent.&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=24&ott_archive_link_evidence=tag%3A+criminal-law%3B+text%3A+state+of+missouri&ott_archive_location=opinion_plain_text_practice_area (slug: criminal-law; source: tag; score: 24; evidence: tag: criminal-law, text: state of missouri)

---
## Opinion

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Opinion
Missouri Court of Appeals Western District
Case Style:  Brenda S. Kidd, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.
Case Number:  55072
Handdown Date:  05/26/1998
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of Clay County, Hon. Michael J. Maloney
Counsel for Appellant: 
Counsel for Respondent: 
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  PER CURIAM
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Howard, P.J., Breckenridge and Spinden, J.J., concur.
Opinion:
ORDER
Brenda S. Kidd appeals the circuit court's judgment to dismiss her motion for postconviction relief because it did 
not satisfy the filing deadline of Rule 24.035.  She challenges the deadline as unconstitutional.  We affirm the circuit 
court's judgment.  Day v. State, 770 S.W.2d 692, 695 (Mo. banc), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 866 (1989) (holding time limits of 
Rule 24.035 to be constitutional and mandatory).  We enter this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Separate Opinion:
None
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.