Case Name: Richard JERALDS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1995-05-30
Citations: 899 S.W.2d 151
Docket Number: No. 67213
Parties: Richard JERALDS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before GRIMM, C.J., REINHARD, P.J., and CRAHAN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 899
Pages: 151–152

Head Matter:
Richard JERALDS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. 67213.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
May 30, 1995.
Deborah B. Wafer, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Becky Owenson Kilpatrick, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Before GRIMM, C.J., REINHARD, P.J., and CRAHAN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals the motion court's dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. The motion court dismissed the motion on grounds it was filed more than ninety-days after his delivery to the department of corrections.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the conclusion of the motion court that Defendant failed to timely file his application for post-conviction relief is not clearly erroneous. Defendant's sole point on appeal concerns a claim challenging the time limitations for Rule 24.035 motions. The Missouri Supreme Court in Day v. State, 770 S.W.2d 692, 695 (Mo. bane 1989) upheld the post-conviction filing restrictions as valid and mandatory. Defendant acknowledges this precedent and requests this court reconsider the issue. We decline. This court has consistently held the time limitations are reasonable and any failure to comply requires dismissal of the claim. As an extended opinion would have no prece-dential value, we affirm the judgment in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).