Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Drew Ryland Missouri Cases

This party appears in the Ott Law Firm Missouri court opinion archive. The cases below connect legal research paths to related practice pages when the opinions map to practical client issues.

Party ID
drew-ryland
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Criminal Law
Archive note: 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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source. This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.

Related Practice Pages

Practical guidance connected to this party profile

These links route party-name research from the court archive into Ott Law Firm practice pages when the associated opinions map to a practical client issue.

Legal Help From The Archive

Need help turning court research into a case plan?

If a party-profile research path points to a current injury, employment, insurance, or litigation issue, Ott Law Firm can review the facts and explain practical next steps.

Cases Involving Drew Ryland

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Mar 23, 2021

Drew Ryland vs. State of Missouri

Appellant

Drew Ryland appealed the circuit court's judgment overruling his amended Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, arguing that the motion court improperly granted an unauthorized second extension for filing the amended motion. The appellate court reversed and remanded, holding that the motion court lacked authority to grant the second extension under the version of Rule 29.15 in effect. The case was remanded for the motion court to determine the status of Ryland's post-conviction counsel (appointed or retained) and, based on that determination, either conduct an abandonment inquiry or adjudicate Ryland's pro se motion on its merits.