Legal Opinion

Williams v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided July 28, 1987No. 52143PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOWD, Judge.

Henry Lee Williams, hereinafter movant, appeals following the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion seeking to set aside his conviction of rape and sodomy. We affirm.

Movant’s first point on appeal summarily asserts that the trial court erred in denying his motion by finding movant’s trial counsel rendered effective counsel where trial counsel failed to cross-examine the victim as to an alleged prior inconsistent statement as to the date the incident occurred. Our review of a judgment overruling a Rule 27.26 motion is limited to whether “the findings, conclusions and judgment are clearly…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. State v. ThomasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1981
  3. Love v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1984
  4. Laws v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1986
  5. Johnson v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1981

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Henry Lee Williams-Bey v. Myrna E. TrickeyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990
  2. Pollard v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1991
  3. Harry v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. W.F.W. v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989
  5. Jackson v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989

1 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