James v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

James v. State

169 S.W.3d 557, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1203, 2005 WL 1949506

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 16, 2005

DocketWD 64408

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 169 S.W.3d 557 (James 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

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

Pincite

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

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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 S.W.3d 557, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1203, 2005 WL 1949506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-v-state-moctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack