Lane v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Lane v. State

352 S.W.3d 616, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1399, 2011 WL 5041312

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 25, 2011

DocketWD 72496

StatusPublished

This text of 352 S.W.3d 616 (Lane 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

Lane v. State, 352 S.W.3d 616, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1399, 2011 WL 5041312 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Charles Lane, Jr. appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. Lane claims that the motion court clearly erred because he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Lane contends that his trial counsel failed (1) to assert Lane’s diminished capacity at the time of the killing by failing to ask the testifying psychiatrist whether Lane’s mental illness affected his ability to deliberate, and (2) to request that the trial court give the diminished capacity instruction to the jury. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Charles Lane, Jr. appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. Lane claims that the motion court clearly erred because he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Lane contends that his trial counsel failed (1) to assert Lane’s diminished capacity at the time of the killing by failing to ask the testifying psychiatrist whether Lane’s mental illness affected his ability to deliberate, and (2) to request that the trial court give the diminished capacity instruction to the jury. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

352 S.W.3d 616, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1399, 2011 WL 5041312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lane-v-state-moctapp-2011.