Strother v. State
This text of 343 S.W.3d 771 (Strother 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.
Opinion
ORDER
Leonard Strother appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing. Strother claims that the motion court erred in denying his Rule 29.15 motion without an evi-dentiary hearing because Strother pleaded factual allegations which, if proven, would warrant relief and which are not refuted by the record. Strother claims he was prejudiced by his trial counsel’s failure to object to his verdict director for attempted burglary in the first degree because the verdict director omitted an element of the offense when it failed to require the jury to find that a person was present in the structure who was not a participant in the crime. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
343 S.W.3d 771, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 980, 2011 WL 3047632, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strother-v-state-moctapp-2011.