Martin v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Martin v. State

333 S.W.3d 534, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 356, 2011 WL 900035

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 15, 2011

DocketED 94599

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 333 S.W.3d 534 (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.

Bluebook

Martin v. State, 333 S.W.3d 534, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 356, 2011 WL 900035 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jerome Martin (“Movant”) appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant asserts that the motion court clearly erred in denying his claim, after an evidentiary hearing, that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to: (1) call an impeachment witness and (2) object to the verdict director.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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