Legal Opinion

Starr v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided July 7, 1987No. 52041PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KAROHL, Judge.

Movant appeals denial of post conviction relief. Movant’s pro se Rule 27.26 motion was supplemented by an amended motion filed by appointed counsel. After an evi-dentiary hearing the court entered required findings of fact, conclusions of law and denied relief.

Defendant appealed his conviction and sentences of two counts of robbery first degree, Section 569.020 RSMo 1978, and one count of armed criminal action, Section 571.015 RSMo 1978. In the direct appeal movant did not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support the convictions. We there held no trial court error…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Roger Lee McQueen v. Harold R. Swenson, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1974
  3. Seales v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1979
  4. Love v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1984
  5. Haynes v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1976

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. LayMissouri Court of Appeals · 1995
  2. Thomas v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988
  3. State v. JohnsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. Williams v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API