King v. State
144 S.W.3d 893, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 1415, 2004 WL 2158900
Opinion
Order
Russell King appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. He claims the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion after an evidentiary hearing because he established that his trial counsel was ineffective by failing to investigate and call two witnesses in his defense.
Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
King v. State, 144 S.W.3d 893, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 1415, 2004 WL 2158900 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004).
144 S.W.3d 893 (King v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.