Pennell v. State
Opinion
ORDER
Michael M. Pennell appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary, hearing. Pennell alleges two claims of ineffective assistance of counsel: 1) appellate counsel failed to argue that there was insufficient evidence to establish that what he delivered was a controlled substance; and 2) trial counsel was ineffective by eliciting evidence regarding the police’s investigation into Pen-nell prior to his arrest in the' underlying criminal case. Finding no clear error, we affirm.
The judgment of the trial court is based on findings of fact that are- not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
485 S.W.3d 392 (Pennell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.