Richardson v. State
304 S.W.3d 242, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1838, 2009 WL 5083434
Opinion
ORDER
James Richardson appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, Richardson claims that the circuit court clearly erred in denying his motion because he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.
The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Richardson v. State, 304 S.W.3d 242, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1838, 2009 WL 5083434 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).
304 S.W.3d 242 (Richardson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Richardson v. State
325 S.W.3d 553 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2010)