Tenner v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Tenner v. State

252 S.W.3d 258, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 645, 2008 WL 2045008

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 13, 2008

DocketWD 68325

StatusPublished

This text of 252 S.W.3d 258 (Tenner 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

Tenner v. State, 252 S.W.3d 258, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 645, 2008 WL 2045008 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Ranson Tenner appeals the trial court’s judgment that denied his motion for post-conviction relief. After a jury trial, Appellant was convicted in Jackson County Circuit Court on Count I for felony murder in the second degree, § 565.021.1(2), RSMo 2000; on Count II *259 for assault in the second degree, § 565.060; on Count III for tampering in the first degree, § 569.080.1(2); on Count IV for leaving the scene of a motor vehicle accident, § 577.060; on Count V for careless and imprudent driving, § 304.012; and on Count VI for resisting arrest, § 575.150. On appeal, Appellant raises a single Point Relied On, arguing that his trial counsel afforded him constitutionally ineffective assistance when he failed to object to admission into evidence of an out-of-court statement of an unavailable witness.

We deny Appellant’s Point, and affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Ranson Tenner appeals the trial court’s judgment that denied his motion for post-conviction relief. After a jury trial, Appellant was convicted in Jackson County Circuit Court on Count I for felony murder in the second degree, § 565.021.1(2), RSMo 2000; on Count II *259 for assault in the second degree, § 565.060; on Count III for tampering in the first degree, § 569.080.1(2); on Count IV for leaving the scene of a motor vehicle accident, § 577.060; on Count V for careless and imprudent driving, § 304.012; and on Count VI for resisting arrest, § 575.150. On appeal, Appellant raises a single Point Relied On, arguing that his trial counsel afforded him constitutionally ineffective assistance when he failed to object to admission into evidence of an out-of-court statement of an unavailable witness.

We deny Appellant’s Point, and affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 S.W.3d 258, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 645, 2008 WL 2045008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tenner-v-state-moctapp-2008.