Tillman v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Tillman v. State

361 S.W.3d 441, 2011 WL 5921451

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 29, 2011

DocketWD 73028

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 361 S.W.3d 441 (Tillman 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

Tillman v. State, 361 S.W.3d 441, 2011 WL 5921451 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Marshall Tillman appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. Tillman claims that the motion court clearly erred because he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Tillman contends that trial counsel failed to specifically and contemporaneously object to the testimony of the current medical examiner who testified regarding the conclusions that a former medical examiner reached about the cause of death of the victim. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Marshall Tillman appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. Tillman claims that the motion court clearly erred because he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Tillman contends that trial counsel failed to specifically and contemporaneously object to the testimony of the current medical examiner who testified regarding the conclusions that a former medical examiner reached about the cause of death of the victim. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

361 S.W.3d 441, 2011 WL 5921451, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tillman-v-state-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack