Wright v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Wright v. State

409 S.W.3d 580, 2013 WL 5375496, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1113

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 24, 2013

DocketNo. WD 75260

StatusPublished

This text of 409 S.W.3d 580 (Wright v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wright v. State, 409 S.W.3d 580, 2013 WL 5375496, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1113 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Brian Wright appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion, after he was convicted of sexual abuse and false imprisonment. Wright contends the motion court clearly erred in denying post-conviction relief because defense counsel was ineffective for failing to present evidence that would have aided his credibility and provided him with a viable defense. For reasons explained in a Memorandum provided to the parties, we find no error and affirm the motion court’s 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.

Brian Wright appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion, after he was convicted of sexual abuse and false imprisonment. Wright contends the motion court clearly erred in denying post-conviction relief because defense counsel was ineffective for failing to present evidence that would have aided his credibility and provided him with a viable defense. For reasons explained in a Memorandum provided to the parties, we find no error and affirm the motion court’s judgment.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

409 S.W.3d 580, 2013 WL 5375496, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-state-moctapp-2013.