Ineffective counsel winner

2001 MT 208
STATE OF MONTANA,
Respondent/Respondent,
v.
KENNETH LEROY WHITLOW

1. Did the District Court err when it determined that Whitlow's petition was not filed within the applicable statute of limitations?
2. Did the District Court err when it determined that Whitlow's petition was barred
because he could have reasonably raised his claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel on direct appeal?
3. Did the District Court err when it denied Whitlow's motion to amend his petition to allege a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel?
Applying the preceding analysis to the instant case, we hold that Whitlow's ineffective assistance of counsel claim could not have reasonably been raised on direct appeal because his allegations of ineffectiveness cannot be documented from the record in the underlying case. See Hagen,
For the aforementioned reasons, we reverse the District Court's conclusion that
Whitlow's ineffective assistance of counsel claim is barred by § 46-21-105(2), MCA.
Nothing in the foregoing opinion should be construed as comment on the merits of
Whitlow's claim.
ISSUE THREE
Did the District Court err when it denied Whitlow's motion to amend his petition to
allege a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel?
Because we have held that Whitlow was not required to raise his claim of ineffective
assistance of trial counsel during the direct appeal from his conviction, his claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is moot.
Reversed and remanded.