From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

West v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Jan 29, 2019
566 S.W.3d 268 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019)

Opinion

WD 81214

01-29-2019

Wayne E. WEST, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Natalie Hull Hoge, Senior Public Defender, Kansas City, MO, Attorney for Appellant. Eric S. Schmitt, Attorney General, and Robert J. (Jeff) Bartholomew, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, Attorneys for Respondent.


Natalie Hull Hoge, Senior Public Defender, Kansas City, MO, Attorney for Appellant.

Eric S. Schmitt, Attorney General, and Robert J. (Jeff) Bartholomew, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, Attorneys for Respondent.

Before Division Four: Karen King Mitchell, Chief Judge, and Mark D. Pfeiffer and Thomas N. Chapman, Judges

Order

Per Curiam:

Wayne West appeals, following an evidentiary hearing, the denial of his amended Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, in which he argued that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and produce witnesses regarding the presence of other individuals at or near the scene of the crime when it occurred. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

West v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Jan 29, 2019
566 S.W.3d 268 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019)
Case details for

West v. State

Case Details

Full title:Wayne E. WEST, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Date published: Jan 29, 2019

Citations

566 S.W.3d 268 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019)