Potter v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Potter v. State

385 S.W.3d 526, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1479, 2012 WL 5866456

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 20, 2012·No. No. WD 74119·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Jason Potter (“Potter”) was convicted, following a jury trial, in the Circuit Court of Caldwell County of (1) possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute; and (2) misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to use, for which he was sentenced to concurrent sentences of ten years and sixty days, respectively. Potter’s convictions were affirmed by this Court in a memorandum pursuant to Rule 30.25(b) in State v. Potter, 283 S.W.3d 309 (Mo.App. W.D.2009). Potter now appeals from the denial of his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, following an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision has been provided to the parties.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Jason Potter (“Potter”) was convicted, following a jury trial, in the Circuit Court of Caldwell County of (1) possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute; and (2) misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to use, for which he was sentenced to concurrent sentences of ten years and sixty days, respectively. Potter’s convictions were affirmed by this Court in a memorandum pursuant to Rule 30.25(b) in State v. Potter, 283 S.W.3d 309 (Mo.App. W.D.2009). Potter now appeals from the denial of his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, following an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision has been provided to the parties.

Potter v. State, 385 S.W.3d 526, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1479, 2012 WL 5866456 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

385 S.W.3d 526 (Potter v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related