Roberts v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Roberts v. State

450 S.W.3d 461, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1090, 2014 WL 4823632

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 30, 2014·No. No. WD 76480·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Mr. Kevin D. Roberts appeals the judgment denying a Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion. Mr. Roberts claims that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the State’s question to him on cross-examination about the credibility of the self-defense story. He further claims that the question was an impermissible comment on post-arrest and pre-Miranda silence.

For reasons stated in the memorandum provided to the parties, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Mr. Kevin D. Roberts appeals the judgment denying a Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion. Mr. Roberts claims that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the State’s question to him on cross-examination about the credibility of the self-defense story. He further claims that the question was an impermissible comment on post-arrest and pre-Miranda silence.

For reasons stated in the memorandum provided to the parties, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Roberts v. State, 450 S.W.3d 461, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1090, 2014 WL 4823632 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

450 S.W.3d 461 (Roberts v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.