570 S.W.3d 184
Mo. Ct. App.2019Background
- Movant Jason C. Voss sold nine heroin capsules and provided syringes to the victim; the victim later injected heroin and was found dead in a hotel room the next day. Autopsy concluded cause: heroin intoxication; coroner listed manner of death: "homicide."
- At trial Movant admitted supplying the drugs and assisting in preparation; he did not seek or obtain medical aid for the victim after noticing signs of overdose.
- The death certificate listing "homicide" was admitted over defense objection; jury convicted Movant of first-degree involuntary manslaughter and distribution of a controlled substance and recommended consecutive sentences totaling 22 years. Direct appeal affirmed convictions.
- Movant filed a Rule 29.15 post-conviction relief (PCR) motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel (trial and appellate) on five grounds: failure to seek redaction of "homicide" on the death certificate; appellate counsel’s failure to raise the issue; trial counsel’s alleged concession of guilt in closing argument; and failure to raise certain penalty-phase evidentiary objections in a motion for new trial.
- After an evidentiary hearing the motion court denied relief. The Court of Appeals affirmed, applying Strickland and concluding counsel’s choices were reasonable or issues were previously litigated on direct appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Voss) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of death certificate (manner "homicide") | Trial counsel ineffective for not seeking redaction; appellate counsel ineffective for not raising it on appeal | Death certificate is prima facie evidence; "homicide" is a coroner's factual/opinion term admissible and not criminal accusation; claim would be frivolous on appeal | Denied — counsel not ineffective; admission was proper and appellate omission reasonable |
| Trial counsel conceding guilt in closing (involuntary manslaughter/distribution) | Counsel essentially conceded guilt by urging jurors to convict of lesser offense | Counsel reasonably pursued a lesser-included offense strategy to avoid second-degree murder; strategy discussed with Movant | Denied — strategy reasonable; no deficient performance found |
| Failure to include penalty-phase witness objections in motion for new trial | Counsel ineffective for not preserving objections to testimony about other overdoses and heroin use around a child | Issues were raised and reviewed on direct appeal; admission, though erroneous, was found non-prejudicial | Denied — claims were litigated on direct appeal and cannot be relitigated in PCR |
| Prejudice under Strickland (general) | Errors in counsel’s performance prejudiced outcome | No deficient performance shown; where no deficiency, prejudice need not be reached | Denied — movant failed to satisfy Strickland performance prong, so no relief granted |
Key Cases Cited
- Dickerson v. State, 269 S.W.3d 889 (Mo. banc 2008) ("homicide" on death certificate is factual/opinion matter within medical examiner's expertise and does not necessarily imply criminality)
- Leisure v. State, 828 S.W.2d 872 (Mo. banc 1992) (counsel not ineffective for failing to bring a motion of doubtful validity)
- Baumruk v. State, 364 S.W.3d 518 (Mo. banc 2012) (counsel not ineffective for failing to file meritless motions)
- McNeal v. State, 412 S.W.3d 886 (Mo. banc 2013) (reasonable strategy to request/propose lesser-included offense when acquittal unlikely)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong ineffective-assistance-of-counsel test)