Weaver v. State

265 S.W.3d 901, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1383, 2008 WL 4547508
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Weaver v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 870
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 14, 2008·No. WD 68664·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Christie D. Weaver (hereinafter Weaver) appeals the circuit court’s denial of her Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel. On appeal, Weaver argues that plea counsel should have called two additional witnesses to help establish that coercion by Charles Villines (Villines) led her to commit the acts leading to her convictions. Having carefully considered Weaver’s contentions on appeal, we find no basis for reversing the decision of the trial court. A published formal opinion would have no precedential value, and the parties have been provided with a memorandum explaining the reasoning of the court. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Weaver v. State, 265 S.W.3d 901, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1383, 2008 WL 4547508 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

265 S.W.3d 901 (Weaver v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Loyd v. State Automobile Property & Casualty Co.
265 S.W.3d 901 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)