James v. State
386 S.W.3d 237, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1503, 2012 WL 5907468
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in James v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1575 →
Opinion
Order
Bruce James appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion after an evi-dentiary hearing. A jury convicted James of forcible sodomy and felonious restraint. In this post-conviction appeal, James contends the motion court clearly erred in denying his claim that defense counsel was ineffective for stipulating that the samples for the sexual assault kit were properly collected and preserved. For reasons explained in a Memorandum provided to the parties, we find no error and affirm the motion court’s judgment.
AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
James v. State, 386 S.W.3d 237, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1503, 2012 WL 5907468 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).
386 S.W.3d 237 (James v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.