Butler v. State

249 S.W.3d 924, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 515, 2008 WL 1722806
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 15, 2008·No. ED 89291·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Alvin Butler, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, movant argues that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to a certain person serving as an alternate juror.

The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Butler v. State, 249 S.W.3d 924, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 515, 2008 WL 1722806 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

249 S.W.3d 924 (Butler v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sumpter v. Blake
249 S.W.3d 924 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)