Houston v. State

556 S.W.3d 124
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedAugust 14, 2018
DocketNo. ED 105857
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 556 S.W.3d 124 (Houston 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.

Bluebook
Houston v. State, 556 S.W.3d 124 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Michael J. Houston ("Houston") appeals from the motion court's denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing. Houston raises two points on appeal, each charging the motion court with clear error for denying his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims. Specifically, Houston asserts that defense counsel gave ineffective assistance because she neglected to request a mistrial after learning that a juror knew a witness, and for conducting an inadequate voir dire. Because the record does not reveal any bias on the part of the juror at issue, nor show that Houston suffered any prejudice resulting from counsel's voir dire, we affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

Related

Houston v. Stange
E.D. Missouri, 2021

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
556 S.W.3d 124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/houston-v-state-moctapp-2018.