Johnson v. State
This text of 330 S.W.3d 498 (Johnson 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.
Opinion
ORDER
Carl B. Johnson (Movant) appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant asserts that the motion court clearly erred in *499 denying, without an evidentiary hearing, his claim that his defense counsel was ineffective for failing to call a witness who would have testified that Movant did not initiate the physical fight with the victim. We affirm.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
330 S.W.3d 498, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 279, 2010 WL 785312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-state-moctapp-2010.