Franklin v. State
308 S.W.3d 266, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 453, 2010 WL 1460306
Opinion
ORDER
Marco Franklin appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. Franklin argues he was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel. The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous.
An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Franklin v. State, 308 S.W.3d 266, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 453, 2010 WL 1460306 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).
308 S.W.3d 266 (Franklin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. French
308 S.W.3d 266 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2010)