Riddle v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Riddle v. State

179 S.W.3d 409, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1804, 2005 WL 3292029

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 6, 2005

DocketWD 63382

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 179 S.W.3d 409 (Riddle 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

Riddle v. State, 179 S.W.3d 409, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1804, 2005 WL 3292029 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order

PER CURIAM.

Donald D. Riddle appeals from the order of the Circuit Court of Jackson County overruling, after an evidentiary hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. After a jury trial, the appellant was convicted of first-degree robbery, in violation of § 569.020, and armed criminal action (ACA), in violation of § 571.015. As a result of his convictions, he was sentenced, as a prior offender, § 558.016, to consecutive prison sentences in the Missouri Department of Corrections of life for first-degree robbery and thirty years for ACA, which were ordered to be served consecutively with the sentences the appellant received on a prior conviction in the Circuit Court of Clay County.

The appellant raises one point on appeal. He claims that the motion court clearly erred in overruling his Rule 29.15 motion, after an evidentiary hearing, because the evidence presented at the motion hearing clearly established that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel for counsel’s failure to impeach the testimony of one of the State’s witnesses.

We affirm pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Order

PER CURIAM.

Donald D. Riddle appeals from the order of the Circuit Court of Jackson County overruling, after an evidentiary hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. After a jury trial, the appellant was convicted of first-degree robbery, in violation of § 569.020, and armed criminal action (ACA), in violation of § 571.015. As a result of his convictions, he was sentenced, as a prior offender, § 558.016, to consecutive prison sentences in the Missouri Department of Corrections of life for first-degree robbery and thirty years for ACA, which were ordered to be served consecutively with the sentences the appellant received on a prior conviction in the Circuit Court of Clay County.

The appellant raises one point on appeal. He claims that the motion court clearly erred in overruling his Rule 29.15 motion, after an evidentiary hearing, because the evidence presented at the motion hearing clearly established that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel for counsel’s failure to impeach the testimony of one of the State’s witnesses.

We affirm pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 S.W.3d 409, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1804, 2005 WL 3292029, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/riddle-v-state-moctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack