Ward v. State
374 S.W.3d 397, 2012 WL 3656336, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1041
Opinion
ORDER
Cody L. Ward appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 2 motion. Ward claims that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to explain why he should waive a preliminary hearing, and that the waiver resulted in Ward not knowing the strength of the State’s evidence. Ward claims his guilty plea was unknowing as a result. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Ward v. State, 374 S.W.3d 397, 2012 WL 3656336, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1041 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).
374 S.W.3d 397 (Ward v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.