State v. Evans

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Evans

936 S.W.2d 893, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 63

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 21, 1997

DocketNos. WD 49602, WD 51436

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 936 S.W.2d 893 (State v. Evans) 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

State v. Evans, 936 S.W.2d 893, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 63 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Kevin Evans was convicted of the class B felony of robbery in the second degree in violation of § 569.030, RSMo 1994, and sentenced as a prior and persistent offender to a term of twelve years imprisonment. He now appeals, claiming that the trial court committed plain error by overruling his motion to suppress the pretrial and in-court identifications that implicated him in the robbery. Mr. Evans also appeals from the denial, after an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel in that his trial counsel failed to call a medical expert as a witness and failed to impeach the key prosecution witness with her testimony at the preliminary hearing.

The judgments of the trial court and the motion court are affirmed. Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Kevin Evans was convicted of the class B felony of robbery in the second degree in violation of § 569.030, RSMo 1994, and sentenced as a prior and persistent offender to a term of twelve years imprisonment. He now appeals, claiming that the trial court committed plain error by overruling his motion to suppress the pretrial and in-court identifications that implicated him in the robbery. Mr. Evans also appeals from the denial, after an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel in that his trial counsel failed to call a medical expert as a witness and failed to impeach the key prosecution witness with her testimony at the preliminary hearing.

The judgments of the trial court and the motion court are affirmed. Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

936 S.W.2d 893, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 63, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-evans-moctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack