Legal Opinion

Cook v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided June 28, 2004No. 25863PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

KENNETH W. SHRUM, Judge.

Jimmy Cook (“Movant”) seeks post-conviction relief via a Rule 29.15 motion after he was convicted of murder in the first degree (§ 565.020) and armed criminal action (§ 571.015). 1 Movant’s Rule 29.15 motion alleged, inter alia, that his trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective when he advised Movant to waive his right to a jury trial in exchange for the State not seeking the death penalty. After an evidentiary hearing, the motion court denied Movant’s requested relief. Movant appeals. We affirm.

FACTS

In his direct appeal, Movant did not challenge the sufficiency…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Atkins v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  3. State v. ErvinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1992
  4. State v. NewlonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982
  5. State v. TisiusSupreme Court of Missouri · 2002

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Beal v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API