Stanley v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Stanley v. State

254 S.W.3d 926, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 932, 2008 WL 2437990

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 17, 2008

DocketWD 68196

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 254 S.W.3d 926 (Stanley 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

Stanley v. State, 254 S.W.3d 926, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 932, 2008 WL 2437990 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Earl B. Stanley appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion asserting ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. Stanley was convicted, after a jury trial, of one count of first-degree child molestation and one count of first-degree statutory sodomy. He was sentenced to a term of fifteen *927 years and thirty years, respectively, the sentences to run concurrently. This court affirmed the judgment on direct appeal, and, after an evidentiary hearing, the motion court denied Stanley’s Rule 29.15 motion.

Stanley asserts that his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise as error the exclusion of certain evidence relating to prior acts of the victim. After a review of the record, this court concludes that the evidence was properly excluded at trial and appellate counsel cannot be held to have been ineffective for failing to raise a frivolous claim. The motion court did not clearly err in denying Stanley’s Rule 29.15 motion. A lengthy opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum of the court’s analysis.

Judgement affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Earl B. Stanley appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion asserting ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. Stanley was convicted, after a jury trial, of one count of first-degree child molestation and one count of first-degree statutory sodomy. He was sentenced to a term of fifteen *927 years and thirty years, respectively, the sentences to run concurrently. This court affirmed the judgment on direct appeal, and, after an evidentiary hearing, the motion court denied Stanley’s Rule 29.15 motion.

Stanley asserts that his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise as error the exclusion of certain evidence relating to prior acts of the victim. After a review of the record, this court concludes that the evidence was properly excluded at trial and appellate counsel cannot be held to have been ineffective for failing to raise a frivolous claim. The motion court did not clearly err in denying Stanley’s Rule 29.15 motion. A lengthy opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum of the court’s analysis.

Judgement affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 S.W.3d 926, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 932, 2008 WL 2437990, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stanley-v-state-moctapp-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack