From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Betzel v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
Apr 21, 2015
475 S.W.3d 703 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015)

Opinion

No. ED 101094

04-21-2015

Larry Betzel, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.

Gwenda R. Robinson, Missouri Public Defender Office, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, Missouri 63101, for Appellant. Mary H. Moore, Assistant Attorney General, PO Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102, for Respondent.


Gwenda R. Robinson, Missouri Public Defender Office, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, Missouri 63101, for Appellant.

Mary H. Moore, Assistant Attorney General, PO Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102, for Respondent.

Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., Mary K. Hoff, J., and Philip M. Hess, J.

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Larry Betzel (Movant) appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Movant claims the motion court clearly erred in denying his post-conviction motion because his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and locate a videotape to use as impeachment evidence. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying post-conviction relief. 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

Betzel v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
Apr 21, 2015
475 S.W.3d 703 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015)
Case details for

Betzel v. State

Case Details

Full title:Larry Betzel, Movant/Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

Date published: Apr 21, 2015

Citations

475 S.W.3d 703 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015)