Sevier v. State

307 S.W.3d 717, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 449, 2010 WL 1460075
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 13, 2010·No. ED 93132·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Mark Sevier (Movant) appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of Warren County denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. Movant contends that the motion *718 court erred in denying his claim that his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to assert on direct appeal that the trial court erred in admitting hearsay testimony from the victim’s mother.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Sevier v. State, 307 S.W.3d 717, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 449, 2010 WL 1460075 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

307 S.W.3d 717 (Sevier v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Weedman v. State
307 S.W.3d 717 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2010)