From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beatty v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One
Feb 4, 2003
96 S.W.3d 909 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003)

Opinion

No. ED 81081

February 4, 2003

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Franklin County; Randolph E. Puchta, Judge.

Irene C. Karns, Assistant State Public Defender, Columbia, MO, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Dora A. Fichter, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Before Robert G. Dowd, Jr., P.J., Mary K. Hoff, J., and George W. Draper III, J.



ORDER


Rick G. Beatty (hereinafter, "Movant") appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 29.15 after an evidentiary hearing. Movant claims his trial counsel denied him effective assistance of counsel by failing to properly characterize evidence in the opening statement and in failing to question witnesses regarding the location of shell casings and prior knowledge of the victims' reputations.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court's decision was not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k); Middleton v. State, 80 S.W.3d 799 (Mo. banc 2002). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, we have provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Beatty v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One
Feb 4, 2003
96 S.W.3d 909 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003)
Case details for

Beatty v. State

Case Details

Full title:RICK BEATTY, Appellant, v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One

Date published: Feb 4, 2003

Citations

96 S.W.3d 909 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003)