Watts v. State

446 S.W.3d 722, 2014 WL 4065658, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 881
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 19, 2014·No. No. WD 75961·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, Preston K. Watts, appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing by the Circuit Court of Bates County. Watts argues on appeal that (1) trial counsel was ineffective in eliciting hearsay, specifically, an out-of-court statement made by Brian Watts; (2) the trial court erred in considering his ability to pay the costs of his pretrial incarceration in determining whether to order him into a long-term treatment program; and (3) trial counsel and direct appeal counsel were ineffective for failing to address or raise as plain error the trial court’s alleged error in determining whether to order long-term treatment. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Watts v. State, 446 S.W.3d 722, 2014 WL 4065658, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 881 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).

446 S.W.3d 722 (Watts v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.