Cockrell v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Cockrell v. State

471 S.W.3d 786, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1013, 2015 WL 5823383

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 6, 2015·No. No. ED 102297·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Duron Cockrell (Movant) appeals the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant claims trial counsel was ineffective for adducing and failing to object to evidence about Mov-ant’s prior bad acts. We affirm.

[787] We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying post-conviction relief. Ah éxtend-ed opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Duron Cockrell (Movant) appeals the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant claims trial counsel was ineffective for adducing and failing to object to evidence about Mov-ant’s prior bad acts. We affirm.

[787] We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying post-conviction relief. Ah éxtend-ed opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. Rule 84.16(b).

Cockrell v. State, 471 S.W.3d 786, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1013, 2015 WL 5823383 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

471 S.W.3d 786 (Cockrell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.