From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Standifer v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Apr 30, 2019
572 S.W.3d 168 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019)

Opinion

WD 80920

04-30-2019

Marlyn STANDIFER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Natalie Hull Hoge, Kansas City, MO, for appellant. Shaun J. Mackelprang, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.


Natalie Hull Hoge, Kansas City, MO, for appellant.

Shaun J. Mackelprang, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Before Division Two: Thomas N. Chapman, Presiding Judge, Mark D. Pfeiffer, Judge and Cynthia L. Martin, Judge

ORDER

Per curiam:

Marlyn Standifer appeals from the denial of his post-conviction motion following an evidentiary hearing. Standifer argues that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion because trial counsel was ineffective for conceding during closing argument that Standifer, who was charged as an accomplice, was in the getaway car without arguing that all of the essential elements of attempted robbery and burglary were not supported by the State's evidence. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Standifer v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Apr 30, 2019
572 S.W.3d 168 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019)
Case details for

Standifer v. State

Case Details

Full title:Marlyn STANDIFER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Date published: Apr 30, 2019

Citations

572 S.W.3d 168 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019)