Whited v. State

255 S.W.3d 529, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 826, 2008 WL 2416955
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Whited v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1087
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 17, 2008·No. ED 90134·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

William Whited appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 1 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. Whited argues that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and call a witness. The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

1

. All references to Rules are to Missouri Supreme Court Rules (2008).

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

Whited v. State, 255 S.W.3d 529, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 826, 2008 WL 2416955 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

255 S.W.3d 529 (Whited v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Crp
255 S.W.3d 529 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)
State v. Whited
144 S.W.3d 315 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2004)