Webb v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Webb v. State

400 S.W.3d 909, 2013 WL 3131597, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 750

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 18, 2013·No. No. WD 74456·Published

Opinion

Order

PER CURIAM.

Antonio Webb appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion after he was convicted of second-degree murder and armed criminal action for the shooting death of his wife. Webb contends he was entitled to post-conviction relief because his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to: (1) object to the State’s expert witness’s opinion regarding the range from which the gun was shot, and (2) provide a defense expert with additional documents relating to Webb’s mental health. For reasons explained in a Memorandum provided to the parties, we find no error and affirm the judgment.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Order

PER CURIAM.

Antonio Webb appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion after he was convicted of second-degree murder and armed criminal action for the shooting death of his wife. Webb contends he was entitled to post-conviction relief because his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to: (1) object to the State’s expert witness’s opinion regarding the range from which the gun was shot, and (2) provide a defense expert with additional documents relating to Webb’s mental health. For reasons explained in a Memorandum provided to the parties, we find no error and affirm the judgment.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).

Webb v. State, 400 S.W.3d 909, 2013 WL 3131597, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 750 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

400 S.W.3d 909 (Webb v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.