Dudley v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Dudley v. State

327 S.W.3d 19, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1504, 2010 WL 4449090

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Dudley v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 385 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 9, 2010·No. WD 71417·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Avin Dudley appeals the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Dudley claims that the trial court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing, because he alleged facts which if true would entitle him to relief. Dudley maintains that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial counsel failed to call an alibi witness at trial. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Avin Dudley appeals the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Dudley claims that the trial court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing, because he alleged facts which if true would entitle him to relief. Dudley maintains that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial counsel failed to call an alibi witness at trial. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Dudley v. State, 327 S.W.3d 19, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1504, 2010 WL 4449090 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

327 S.W.3d 19 (Dudley v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related