Harrell v. State
This text of 414 S.W.3d 684 (Harrell v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
ORDER
Raymon Harrell (Movant) appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant claims that the motion court erred in denying his claim that his defense counsel was ineffective in failing to call two witnesses to testify at trial.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court’s decision to deny Movant’s Rule 29.15 motion was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
414 S.W.3d 684, 2013 WL 6199548, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1411, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrell-v-state-moctapp-2013.