Standifer v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Standifer v. State

572 S.W.3d 168

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 30, 2019

DocketWD 80920

StatusPublished

This text of 572 S.W.3d 168 (Standifer 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

Standifer v. State, 572 S.W.3d 168 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Per curiam:

Marlyn Standifer appeals from the denial of his post-conviction motion following an evidentiary hearing. Standifer argues that the motion court clearly erred in denying *169his motion because trial counsel was ineffective for conceding during closing argument that Standifer, who was charged as an accomplice, was in the getaway car without arguing that all of the essential elements of attempted robbery and burglary were not supported by the State's evidence. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Per curiam:

Marlyn Standifer appeals from the denial of his post-conviction motion following an evidentiary hearing. Standifer argues that the motion court clearly erred in denying *169his motion because trial counsel was ineffective for conceding during closing argument that Standifer, who was charged as an accomplice, was in the getaway car without arguing that all of the essential elements of attempted robbery and burglary were not supported by the State's evidence. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

572 S.W.3d 168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/standifer-v-state-moctapp-2019.