Hamilton v. State

KENNETH W. SHRUM, Judge.

This is a Rule 29.15 case in which the motion court dismissed Movant’s request for post-conviction relief without an evi-dentiary hearing.1 Movant appeals, charging the motion court with reversible error for not holding an evidentiary hearing on his ineffective assistance allegation that his trial lawyer mishandled a prosecutorial conflict issue. We disagree. In Movant’s direct appeal, we found no “manifest injustice” or “miscarriage of justice” resulted from the prosecutorial conflict problem.2 Our finding in Hamilton I forecloses Mov-ant from relitigating this issue…