Donahue v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Donahue v. State

362 S.W.3d 70, 2012 WL 1034183, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 425

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 27, 2012

DocketWD 72811

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 362 S.W.3d 70 (Donahue 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

Donahue v. State, 362 S.W.3d 70, 2012 WL 1034183, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 425 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Abelee Donahue appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Donahue claims that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion because he received ineffective assistance of counsel in that his trial attorney failed to call an expert witness at trial. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Abelee Donahue appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Donahue claims that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion because he received ineffective assistance of counsel in that his trial attorney failed to call an expert witness at trial. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

362 S.W.3d 70, 2012 WL 1034183, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donahue-v-state-moctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack