From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scott v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.
Mar 10, 2015
456 S.W.3d 527 (E.D. Mo. 2015)

Opinion

No. ED 101155

03-10-2015

Maurice Scott, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.

Jessica Hathaway, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for appellant. Chris Koster, Attorney General, Shaun J. Mackelprang, Asst. Attorney General, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102–0899, for respondent.


Jessica Hathaway, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for appellant.

Chris Koster, Attorney General, Shaun J. Mackelprang, Asst. Attorney General, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102–0899, for respondent.

Before Kurt S. Odenwald, P.J. and Robert G. Dowd, Jr. and Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Maurice Scott appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. Scott argues that his trial counsel was ineffective for advising him not to testify in his own defense. We find the motion court's findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous and affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Scott v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.
Mar 10, 2015
456 S.W.3d 527 (E.D. Mo. 2015)
Case details for

Scott v. State

Case Details

Full title:Maurice Scott, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent.

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

Date published: Mar 10, 2015

Citations

456 S.W.3d 527 (E.D. Mo. 2015)