Legal Opinion

Royer v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided August 21, 2013No. SD 32200PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMary W. Sheffield, J.

Michael Lee Royer (“Movant”) appeals the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.151 *488motion for post-conviction relief. He argues the motion court clearly erred in denying his claim that Matt Ward (“appellate counsel”) was ineffective for failing on direct appeal to challenge the trial court’s denial of Movant’s motion to suppress an eyewitness identification. We disagree and affirm the motion court’s denial of postconviction relief.

Standard of Review

Appellate review of the denial of a Rule 29.15 motion is limited to a determination of whether the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. MiddletonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1999
  2. State v. WeaverSupreme Court of Missouri · 1995
  3. BAUMRUK v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2012
  4. State v. BynumSupreme Court of Missouri · 1984
  5. Taylor v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2008

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. JAMES L. JARRETT, Movant-Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent-RespondentMissouri Court of Appeals · 2019
  2. Jarrett v. RameyDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 2023
  3. John Billingsley v. State of MissouriMissouri Court of Appeals · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API