From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sprofera v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Sep 29, 2020
613 S.W.3d 799 (Mo. Ct. App. 2020)

Opinion

WD 82444

09-29-2020

Joseph B. SPROFERA, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Damien de Loyola, District Defender, Kansas City, MO, Attorney for Appellant. Eric S. Schmitt, Attorney General, and Gregory L. Barnes, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, Attorneys for Respondent.


Damien de Loyola, District Defender, Kansas City, MO, Attorney for Appellant.

Eric S. Schmitt, Attorney General, and Gregory L. Barnes, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, Attorneys for Respondent.

Before Division Two: Karen King Mitchell, Presiding Judge, and Anthony Rex Gabbert and W. Douglas Thomson, Judges

Order

Per Curiam:

Joseph Sprofera appeals, following an evidentiary hearing, the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief. Sprofera raises four claims on appeal. His first three points argue that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to object to various questions and comments by the prosecutor during his trial and that the motion court erred in denying these claims because it erroneously determined that counsel's failure to object in each scenario was the result of reasonable trial strategy. His fourth point argues that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present evidence that Sprofera offered to take a polygraph examination and that the motion court erred in denying this claim because it erroneously determined such evidence inadmissible. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Sprofera v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Sep 29, 2020
613 S.W.3d 799 (Mo. Ct. App. 2020)
Case details for

Sprofera v. State

Case Details

Full title:Joseph B. SPROFERA, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Date published: Sep 29, 2020

Citations

613 S.W.3d 799 (Mo. Ct. App. 2020)