Robinson v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Robinson v. State

171 S.W.3d 802, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1377, 2005 WL 2276923

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 20, 2005

DocketNo. ED 85319

StatusPublished

This text of 171 S.W.3d 802 (Robinson 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

Robinson v. State, 171 S.W.3d 802, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1377, 2005 WL 2276923 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Michael Robinson, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, movant argues that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by not objecting to an answer given by the victim during cross-examination.

The motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Michael Robinson, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, movant argues that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by not objecting to an answer given by the victim during cross-examination.

The motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 S.W.3d 802, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1377, 2005 WL 2276923, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-state-moctapp-2005.