Martin v. State
This text of 69 S.W.3d 142 (Martin 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
Samuel Martin (Movant) appeals from a judgment denying his request for post-conviction relief under Rule 29.151 without an evidentiary hearing. Movant claims ineffective assistance of trial counsel. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court’s judgment is not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 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
69 S.W.3d 142, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 372, 2002 WL 262561, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-state-moctapp-2002.