From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Mar 31, 2020
596 S.W.3d 672 (Mo. Ct. App. 2020)

Opinion

WD 82177

03-31-2020

Marcus D. SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Susan L. Hogan, Kansas City, MO, for appellant. Richard A. Starnes, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.


Susan L. Hogan, Kansas City, MO, for appellant.

Richard A. Starnes, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Before Division Two: Cynthia L. Martin, Presiding Judge, Thomas H. Newton, Judge and Gary D. Witt, Judge

ORDER

Per curiam: Marcus D. Smith appeals the motion court's denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, and argues that the motion court clearly erred in rejecting Smith's assertion that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to victim impact testimony during the guilt phase of the trial and for eliciting testimony from a medical examiner that cannabinoids were found in the victim's bloodstream, thereby opening the door to evidence of the victim's good character. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Smith v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Mar 31, 2020
596 S.W.3d 672 (Mo. Ct. App. 2020)
Case details for

Smith v. State

Case Details

Full title:Marcus D. SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Date published: Mar 31, 2020

Citations

596 S.W.3d 672 (Mo. Ct. App. 2020)