Hoff v. State

Summary

The court affirmed denial of Hoff’s third postconviction-relief application and related Rule 60(b) motion. It held that the sequestration order applied only to the doctor whom the State specifically requested be sequestered, and that Hoff failed to show a qualifying disability or mental disease prevented timely filing of his application. The court also held that Hoff waived his challenge to the Rule 60(b) ruling by failing to brief it and declined to reach res judicata and misuse of process. No separate opinions were filed.