Lewis v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Lewis v. State

143 S.W.3d 764, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 1335, 2004 WL 2093437

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 21, 2004

DocketNo. WD 63002

StatusPublished

This text of 143 S.W.3d 764 (Lewis 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

Lewis v. State, 143 S.W.3d 764, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 1335, 2004 WL 2093437 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order

PER CURIAM.

Steven Lewis appeals from the motion court’s order overruling, after an eviden-tiary hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. After a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Henry County, the appellant was convicted of one count of assault in the first degree, § 565.050, and one count of burglary in the first degree, § 569.160. As a result of his convictions, he was sentenced to consecutive terms in the Missouri Department of Corrections of thirty years for assault and ten years for burglary.

The appellant raises two points on appeal. He claims that the motion court erred in overruling his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, after an eviden-tiary hearing, because the evidence at the motion hearing conclusively established that he received ineffective assistance of counsel for trial counsel’s failure to: (1) “provide [him] with discovery or otherwise inform him of the state’s evidence against him so that he could make a reasoned decision about whether to accept” the State’s plea offers or to advise him on whether to accept the offers; and (2) call any witnesses to contradict the State’s assertion that his hand injuries were caused by the assault on the victim.

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.

Steven Lewis appeals from the motion court’s order overruling, after an eviden-tiary hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. After a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Henry County, the appellant was convicted of one count of assault in the first degree, § 565.050, and one count of burglary in the first degree, § 569.160. As a result of his convictions, he was sentenced to consecutive terms in the Missouri Department of Corrections of thirty years for assault and ten years for burglary.

The appellant raises two points on appeal. He claims that the motion court erred in overruling his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, after an eviden-tiary hearing, because the evidence at the motion hearing conclusively established that he received ineffective assistance of counsel for trial counsel’s failure to: (1) “provide [him] with discovery or otherwise inform him of the state’s evidence against him so that he could make a reasoned decision about whether to accept” the State’s plea offers or to advise him on whether to accept the offers; and (2) call any witnesses to contradict the State’s assertion that his hand injuries were caused by the assault on the victim.

We affirm. Rule 84.16(b)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 S.W.3d 764, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 1335, 2004 WL 2093437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lewis-v-state-moctapp-2004.