Carmical v. State

365 S.W.3d 618, 2012 WL 1416674, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 547

Opinion

ORDER

Henry Carmical (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant contends the motion court clearly erred in denying his post-conviction motion without a hearing because he alleged facts claiming ineffectiveness of trial and appellate counsel which warranted relief and were not refuted by the record. Specifically, Movant claims trial counsel was ineffective for not allowing Movant to testify in his own defense at trial, for failing to endorse and subpoena an experienced neurologist, and for failing to have a fiber tested for DNA. Also, Movant contends appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to assert on direct appeal that the trial court erred in overruling Movant’s motion to suppress his statements. We affirm.