Geveshausen v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Geveshausen v. State

394 S.W.3d 499, 2013 WL 1197610, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 383

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 26, 2013·No. No. WD 74736·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Bobbi Jo Geveshausen (“Geveshausen”) appeals the motion court’s denial of her Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Gev-eshausen contends that the motion court erred in denying her Rule 24.035 motion in [500] that her trial counsel failed to submit testimony or a statement of the -victim at the sentencing hearing. According to Gevesh-ausen, the victim’s testimony or statement would have supported Geveshausen’s claim that she was manipulated, coerced, and threatened to engage in the criminal conduct by the co-defendant. Geveshausen argues that had the victim’s testimony or statement been received by the trial court, she would have received a lesser sentence. 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:

Bobbi Jo Geveshausen (“Geveshausen”) appeals the motion court’s denial of her Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Gev-eshausen contends that the motion court erred in denying her Rule 24.035 motion in [500] that her trial counsel failed to submit testimony or a statement of the -victim at the sentencing hearing. According to Gevesh-ausen, the victim’s testimony or statement would have supported Geveshausen’s claim that she was manipulated, coerced, and threatened to engage in the criminal conduct by the co-defendant. Geveshausen argues that had the victim’s testimony or statement been received by the trial court, she would have received a lesser sentence. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Geveshausen v. State, 394 S.W.3d 499, 2013 WL 1197610, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 383 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

394 S.W.3d 499 (Geveshausen v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.