State v. Douglas
341 S.W.3d 820, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 745, 2011 WL 2118806
Opinion
ORDER
Jack Douglas was convicted of driving with a revoked driver’s license. He appeals, arguing that the trial court committed reversible error by allowing hearsay statements into evidence, and that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel due to his attorney’s failure to object to certain hearsay statements. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 30.25(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Douglas, 341 S.W.3d 820, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 745, 2011 WL 2118806 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).
341 S.W.3d 820 (State v. Douglas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
In the Matter of Welch
341 S.W.3d 820 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2011)