Bohonsky v. State

527 S.W.3d 126, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 853, 2017 WL 3707036
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 29, 2017·No. WD 79969·Published

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

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

527 S.W.3d 126 (Bohonsky v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.