Shockley v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Shockley v. State

541 S.W.3d 52

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 6, 2018·No. WD 80334·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Bruce Shockley appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 29.15. In his sole point on appeal, he claims the evidence showed that if his counsel had investigated and presented relevant evidence that there is a reasonable probability the outcome of his case would have been different. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided *53to 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

PER CURIAM:

Bruce Shockley appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 29.15. In his sole point on appeal, he claims the evidence showed that if his counsel had investigated and presented relevant evidence that there is a reasonable probability the outcome of his case would have been different. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided *53to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Shockley v. State, 541 S.W.3d 52 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

541 S.W.3d 52 (Shockley v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.