Hawkins v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hawkins v. State

559 S.W.3d 433

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Hawkins v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 125 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 30, 2018·No. WD 80275·Published

Opinion

Per curiam:

Dequan Hawkins appeals from the motion court's denial of his Rule 29.15 amended motion following an evidentiary hearing. Hawkins asserts that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion for post-conviction relief because he received ineffective assistance of counsel in that his trial counsel failed to object to the admission of a witness's entire videotaped statement to police. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Per curiam:

Dequan Hawkins appeals from the motion court's denial of his Rule 29.15 amended motion following an evidentiary hearing. Hawkins asserts that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion for post-conviction relief because he received ineffective assistance of counsel in that his trial counsel failed to object to the admission of a witness's entire videotaped statement to police. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Hawkins v. State, 559 S.W.3d 433 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

559 S.W.3d 433 (Hawkins v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.