From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martin v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Mar 15, 2011
333 S.W.3d 534 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011)

Opinion

No. ED94599.

March 15, 2011.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Robin Ransom Vannoy, Judge.

Brocca L. Smith, Assistant Public Defender, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.

Shaun J. Mackelprang, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Before GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.



ORDER


Jerome Martin ("Movant") appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant asserts that the motion court clearly erred in denying his claim, after an evidentiary hearing, that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to: (1) call an impeachment witness and (2) object to the verdict director.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court's decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Martin v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Mar 15, 2011
333 S.W.3d 534 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011)
Case details for

Martin v. State

Case Details

Full title:Jerome MARTIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District

Date published: Mar 15, 2011

Citations

333 S.W.3d 534 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011)

Citing Cases

Martin v. Russell

The motion court denied relief on September 14, 2009, after an evidentiary hearing. On March 15, 2011, the…