Smith v. State

512 S.W.3d 840, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1334, 2016 WL 7439119

Opinion

Order

Per Curiam

Vernando Smith appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion after he was convicted of first-degree assault of a law enforcement officer and armed criminal action. Smith contends the motion court clearly erred in denying post-conviction relief because his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call a ballistics expert to testify and his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to assert a claim of pros-ecutorial vindictiveness. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision, because a published opinion would have no precedential value.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b)