Glenn B. Mansfield v. State of Missouri

• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
• Decided: May 27, 2025
• Docket: ED112799
• Status: Published

Opinion

and on September 5, 2019, certified Mansfield for prosecution as an adult and transferred his case

to the associate circuit court. The State filed a felony complaint charging Mansfield with first-

degree robbery, first-degree assault, and armed criminal action.

Following certification, trial counsel entered her appearance. Trial counsel filed a motion

with the associate circuit court to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, arguing that the

juvenile court erroneously certified Mansfield as an adult and that Mansfield received ineffective

assistance of certification counsel. After a hearing on the motion to dismiss, the court denied the

jurisdiction motion, held a preliminary hearing, and bound the matter over for trial in the circuit

court.

Trial counsel then filed a motion to dismiss the information in circuit court, which included

the same claims made in the first earlier denied motion. The circuit court denied the motion.

Following a one-day jury trial on July 13, 2021, Mansfield was found guilty on all three counts as

charged. Subsequent trial counsel (L.H.) filed a motion for new trial, raising the claim, among

others, that the circuit court erred in denying the motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. At

sentencing on November 29, 2021, the circuit court sentenced Mansfield to two concurrent ten-

year terms of imprisonment on the first-degree robbery and first-degree assault, and a consecutive

ten-year term on the armed criminal action, for a total of twenty years.

This Court affirmed the judgment and sentences in State v. Mansfield, 656 S.W.3d 45 (Mo.

App. E.D. 2022). Mansfield sought post-conviction relief under Rule 29.15. Appointed counsel

timely filed an amended Rule 29.15 motion.

On December 1, 2023, the motion court held an evidentiary hearing regarding Mansfield’s

ineffective assistance of counsel claims. Mansfield testified on his own behalf and called trial

counsel L.H. and a lay witness to testify. Appellate counsel testified by deposition that the