Jones v. State

297 S.W.3d 639, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1604, 2009 WL 3833996
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 17, 2009·No. ED 91698·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Deryl L. Jones (“Movant”) appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. Movant asserts the motion court clearly erred in denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing because he established his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call Movant as a witness during the hearing on the motion in limine to prohibit blood alcohol evidence and for failing to call Movant as a witness at trial.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. The motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

Jones v. State, 297 S.W.3d 639, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1604, 2009 WL 3833996 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

297 S.W.3d 639 (Jones v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Jones
297 S.W.3d 639 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2009)