Jackson v. State

28 S.W.3d 399, 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 1253, 2000 WL 1182859
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Jackson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 2384
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 22, 2000·No. No. ED 76343·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Malcolm Jackson (Jackson) appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. In his motion for post-conviction relief, Jackson alleged trial counsel was ineffective in failing to present the testimony of certain witnesses. Jackson contends the motion court erred in denying his Rule 29.15 motion. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the transcript and find the claim of error to have no merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their own information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Jackson v. State, 28 S.W.3d 399, 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 1253, 2000 WL 1182859 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000).

28 S.W.3d 399 (Jackson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.