Wolfram v. State
359 S.W.3d 565, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 258, 2012 WL 612471
Opinion
ORDER
Cody Wolfram appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Wolfram claims that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion because he received ineffective assistance of counsel when counsel failed to call character witnesses on Wolfram’s behalf at his sentencing hearing. 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
Wolfram v. State, 359 S.W.3d 565, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 258, 2012 WL 612471 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).
359 S.W.3d 565 (Wolfram v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Jackson v. State
359 S.W.3d 565 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2012)