Bratton v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Bratton v. State

557 S.W.3d 539

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 9, 2018

DocketWD 80741

StatusPublished

This text of 557 S.W.3d 539 (Bratton 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

Bratton v. State, 557 S.W.3d 539 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

*540Following a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Appellant Eric Bratton was convicted of two counts of second-degree assault in violation of § 565.060, RSMo, and two counts of armed criminal action in violation of § 571.015, RSMo. After we affirmed his convictions on direct appeal, Bratton filed a motion for post-conviction relief under Supreme Court Rule 29.15. The circuit court denied Bratton's motion after an evidentiary hearing. Bratton appeals. He first argues that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to references during the prosecutor's opening statement and during a police officer's testimony that Bratton's companion had made statements implicating Bratton. Bratton also argues that his trial counsel was ineffective in advising Bratton to waive jury sentencing, and to instead submit to sentencing by the trial judge, who was a former prosecutor. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, we have provided the parties an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order. Rule 84.16(b).

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

PER CURIAM:

*540Following a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Appellant Eric Bratton was convicted of two counts of second-degree assault in violation of § 565.060, RSMo, and two counts of armed criminal action in violation of § 571.015, RSMo. After we affirmed his convictions on direct appeal, Bratton filed a motion for post-conviction relief under Supreme Court Rule 29.15. The circuit court denied Bratton's motion after an evidentiary hearing. Bratton appeals. He first argues that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to references during the prosecutor's opening statement and during a police officer's testimony that Bratton's companion had made statements implicating Bratton. Bratton also argues that his trial counsel was ineffective in advising Bratton to waive jury sentencing, and to instead submit to sentencing by the trial judge, who was a former prosecutor. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, we have provided the parties an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

557 S.W.3d 539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bratton-v-state-moctapp-2018.