Jackson v. State

66 S.W.3d 180, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 84, 2002 WL 77726
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 January 22, 2002·No. No. ED 79085·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Dale Jackson (hereinafter, “Movant”) appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his motion for post conviction relief pursuant to Rule 29.15. Movant claims his trial counsel denied him effective assistance of counsel by failing to locate and call potential alibi witnesses and by requesting a continuance despite Mov-ant’s failure to consent to a continuance.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the transcripts and find the motion’s court decision was not clearly erroneous. White v. State, 939 S.W.2d 887, 904 (Mo. banc 1997). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential value. The judgment is affirmed 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, 66 S.W.3d 180, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 84, 2002 WL 77726 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002).

66 S.W.3d 180 (Jackson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

White v. State
939 S.W.2d 887 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1997)