Newman v. State
351 S.W.3d 273, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1449, 2011 WL 5137771
Opinion
ORDER
Michael Newman appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. Newman claims that the motion court clearly erred because he received ineffective assistance of counsel in that his trial counsel failed to cross examine the victim adequately. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Newman v. State, 351 S.W.3d 273, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1449, 2011 WL 5137771 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).
351 S.W.3d 273 (Newman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Cadwell v. State
351 S.W.3d 273 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2011)