Legal Opinion

Schnelle v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided January 31, 2003No. WD 60406PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RONALD R. HOLLIGER, Judge.

James Schnelle appeals the denial of his 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. He raises five points on appeal. The first point is dispositive. Schnelle contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel because trial counsel failed to object to the striking of his entire direct testimony when he refused to answer a question on cross-examination concerning one of his prior criminal convictions. We find that the question dealt with a collateral matter (impeachment) and that counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the striking of the defendant’s…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Crane v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Rock v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. Deck v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2002
  5. United States v. John Cardillo, Lawrence Harris, Ralph Kaminsky, John Knapp, Louis Margolis, and Louis PiselliCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. YoleMissouri Court of Appeals · 2004
  2. State v. HerringtonMissouri Court of Appeals · 2010
  3. Seals v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. LARRY G. MCCONNELL, Movant-Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent-RespondentMissouri Court of Appeals · 2024
  5. Robert L. Hook v. State of MissouriMissouri Court of Appeals · 2020

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API