Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Norris E. Payne, Jr. 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
norris-e-payne-jr
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Norris E. Payne, Jr.

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Nov 24, 2020

Norris E. Payne, Jr. vs. State of Missouri

Appellant

Norris E. Payne, Jr. appealed the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. The motion court had denied the motion on its merits, but the appellate court found that Payne's pro se motion was filed four days late under the version of Rule 24.035 applicable at the time. Consequently, the appellate court vacated the motion court's judgment, holding that the motion court lacked authority to consider the merits of an untimely filed motion. The case was remanded with directions to dismiss Payne's motion as untimely.