Goodwin v. State

233 S.W.3d 234, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1331, 2007 WL 2702351
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 18, 2007·No. ED 89016·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Phillip Goodwin appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 1 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Goodwin argues that his trial counsel was ineffective in cross-examining three of the State’s witnesses. 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).

1

. All references to Rules are to Missouri Supreme Court Rules (2007).

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

Goodwin v. State, 233 S.W.3d 234, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1331, 2007 WL 2702351 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

233 S.W.3d 234 (Goodwin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kirsch v. SAKABU
233 S.W.3d 234 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007)