Legal Opinion

Manning-El v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided October 6, 1987No. 52758PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CRIST, Judge.

Movant appeals from the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 27.26 motion. That motion represented movant’s second attempt to vacate two convictions for first degree robbery. The convictions were affirmed on direct appeal. State v. Manning, 634 S.W.2d 504 (Mo.App.1982). We affirm.

Movant’s first Rule 27.26 motion was denied on February 11, 1986; he did not appeal. On March 3, 1986, movant filed a second pro se Rule 27.26 motion. Appointed counsel filed an amended motion asserting ineffective assistance of counsel in two respects; failing to preserve the objection to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. ManningMissouri Court of Appeals · 1982
  2. Boyet v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. McKinney v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1982

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. MacK v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. State v. DuckettMissouri Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. Edwards v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. Smith v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989
  5. Blackmon v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API