Klarr v. State

James Clinton Klarr (“Movant”) appeals the denial of his amended Rule 29.15 post-conviction relief motion after an evidentia-ry hearing.1 Movant’s underlying convictions were for statutory rape in the second degree, statutory sodomy in the second degree, and child molestation in the second degree. See sections 566.034, 566.064, and 566.068.2 In two points relied on, Movant contends the motion court clearly erred in denying Movant’s claims that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to: (1) strike a particular juror for cause based upon voir dire answers suggesting that the juror “would…