Cotton v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Cotton v. State

729 S.W.2d 565, 1987 Mo. App. LEXIS 3880

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 31, 1987

DocketNo. 51723

StatusPublished

This text of 729 S.W.2d 565 (Cotton v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cotton v. State, 729 S.W.2d 565, 1987 Mo. App. LEXIS 3880 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

CLEMENS, Special Commissioner.

After an evidentiary hearing appellant-defendant Roscoe Cotton appeals the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion.

Defendant previously had been jury-convicted of first degree assault; as he was a persistent offender the trial court had sentenced him to life in prison. On appeal we affirmed at 660 S.W.2d 365 (Mo.App.1983).

By this Rule 27.26 motion defendant first contends he had only one previous conviction, not two. The record squarely refutes this. The initial record shows defendant had pled guilty to two previous felonies committed over a month apart. Point denied.

Next, defendant here contends his trial counsel refused to call two alibi witnesses. Defendant called his defense counsel, public defender Ms. Stormy White. She testified she had interviewed both proposed alibi witnesses and believed their testimony would be harmful to defendant. Under those circumstances defendant cannot validly complain. Compare Phillips v. State, 639 S.W.2d 279[3] (Mo.App.1982).

Defendant has failed to meet his burden to show the motion court erred. We affirm.

GARY M. GAERTNER, P.J., and KAROHL, J., concur.

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