Carroll v. State

254 S.W.3d 912, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 770, 2008 WL 2346103
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 10, 2008·No. ED 89859·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Brion Carroll, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, movant argues that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to properly cross-examine a witness.

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

Carroll v. State, 254 S.W.3d 912, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 770, 2008 WL 2346103 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

254 S.W.3d 912 (Carroll v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Witherspoon v. State
254 S.W.3d 912 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)