Background
Jeffrey Gray was convicted of two counts of first-degree statutory sodomy and sentenced to two consecutive life terms. After the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions and issued its mandate, Gray timely filed a pro se motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 29.15. He included a signed and notarized in forma pauperis affidavit stating that he had no income and could not afford an attorney.
The circuit clerk directed Gray to submit a Confidential Case Filing Information Sheet. Gray later refiled the same motion but never submitted the information sheet. The motion court dismissed the proceeding for failure to file timely without appointing counsel. Gray appealed, and the State conceded that the judgment should be reversed.
The Court’s Holding
The Missouri Court of Appeals held that the motion court clearly erred by failing to appoint counsel. Because Gray timely submitted a Rule 29.15 motion requesting in forma pauperis status with the required affidavit, he qualified as indigent, and appointment of counsel was mandatory.
The court also held that Gray’s failure to submit the Confidential Case Filing Information Sheet or provide payment did not justify dismissal. Rule 29.15 imposes no such prerequisite, and appointed counsel could have completed the information sheet if it was required. The court reversed the dismissal and remanded for appointment of counsel and further proceedings, without deciding Gray’s remaining claims concerning timeliness, the information sheet, and dismissal before an amended motion could be filed.
Key Takeaways
- An indigent Rule 29.15 movant who requests in forma pauperis status and supplies the corresponding affidavit must be appointed counsel.
- A Confidential Case Filing Information Sheet and payment are not prerequisites to relief under Rule 29.15.
- The appellate court reversed the dismissal but did not decide the merits of Gray’s post-conviction claims or his remaining procedural arguments.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces that administrative filing requirements cannot displace the protections afforded to indigent post-conviction movants under Rule 29.15. A motion court must appoint counsel once the rule’s indigency requirements are met, allowing counsel to address filing formalities and prepare any amended motion before the post-conviction proceeding is resolved.