Castor v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Castor v. State

277 S.W.3d 343, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 150, 2009 WL 364793

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 17, 2009·No. WD 69212·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Randle Castor appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief in which he claimed counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate, explain to him, and pursue a defense of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous and that no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value but a memorandum explaining our reasoning has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Randle Castor appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief in which he claimed counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate, explain to him, and pursue a defense of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous and that no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value but a memorandum explaining our reasoning has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Castor v. State, 277 S.W.3d 343, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 150, 2009 WL 364793 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

277 S.W.3d 343 (Castor v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related