James v. State

169 S.W.3d 557, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1203, 2005 WL 1949506
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 16, 2005·No. WD 64408·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Rodney James appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion, following an evi-dentiary hearing. Upon review of the record, we find no error and affirm the motion court’s determination that James failed to prove his ineffective assistance of counsel claim by a preponderance of the evidence. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision, because a published opinion would have no precedential value.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).

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

James v. State, 169 S.W.3d 557, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1203, 2005 WL 1949506 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

169 S.W.3d 557 (James v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Martin
169 S.W.3d 557 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2005)