From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Urban v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Oct 4, 2022
653 S.W.3d 132 (Mo. Ct. App. 2022)

Opinion

WD 84923

10-04-2022

Joshua R. URBAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Ellen H. Flottman, Columbia, MO, Counsel for Appellant. Nathan J. Aquino, Jefferson City, MO, Counsel for Respondent.


Ellen H. Flottman, Columbia, MO, Counsel for Appellant.

Nathan J. Aquino, Jefferson City, MO, Counsel for Respondent.

Before Division Four: Gary D. Witt, Chief Judge, Presiding, Anthony Rex Gabbert, Judge, W. Douglas Thomson, Judge

ORDER

Per Curiam:

Joshua R. Urban appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. He contends that the motion court clearly erred in denying his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, arguing that trial counsel prejudicially failed to object to the State's voir dire or move for a mistrial after the voir dire devolved into a lengthy discussion during which venirepersons blamed Urban for the requirement that the child victim testify in open court. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Urban v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Oct 4, 2022
653 S.W.3d 132 (Mo. Ct. App. 2022)
Case details for

Urban v. State

Case Details

Full title:Joshua R. URBAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Date published: Oct 4, 2022

Citations

653 S.W.3d 132 (Mo. Ct. App. 2022)