Bohonsky v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Bohonsky v. State

527 S.W.3d 126, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 853, 2017 WL 3707036

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 29, 2017

DocketWD 79969

StatusPublished

This text of 527 S.W.3d 126 (Bohonsky v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bohonsky v. State, 527 S.W.3d 126, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 853, 2017 WL 3707036 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Order

Per Curiam

Kurt Bohonsky appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief.’ He contends the motion court erred in denying his claim that plea counsel was ineffective because the court applied the incorrect standard in reviewing his claim for ineffective assistance of plea counsel. For reasons explained in a Memorandum provided to the parties, we find no error and affirm the motion court’s judgment.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order

Per Curiam

Kurt Bohonsky appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief.’ He contends the motion court erred in denying his claim that plea counsel was ineffective because the court applied the incorrect standard in reviewing his claim for ineffective assistance of plea counsel. For reasons explained in a Memorandum provided to the parties, we find no error and affirm the motion court’s judgment.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

527 S.W.3d 126, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 853, 2017 WL 3707036, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bohonsky-v-state-moctapp-2017.