Legal Opinion

Wickman v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided June 25, 1985No. 13882PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CROW, Judge.

Harold Floyd Wickman (“movant”) appeals from a judgment denying his amended motion under Rule 27.26 1 to vacate his conviction of robbery in the first degree and 12-year prison sentence. The conviction, a result of trial by jury, was affirmed on direct appeal. State v. Wickman, 655 S.W.2d 749 (Mo.App.1983).

The amended motion to vacate, prepared with the assistance of appointed counsel, alleges that movant received ineffective assistance from the attorney who represented him at the jury trial. We hereafter refer to that attorney as “defense counsel.” In denying the motion to…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Seales v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1979
  2. Smith v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1974
  3. State v. OlsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982
  4. Futrell v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1984
  5. State v. DickersonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1980

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State v. MeggsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1997
  2. Brown v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. Thomas v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988
  4. McIntyre v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Robinson v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988

7 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