History
  • No items yet
midpage
Helm v. State
84 S.W.3d 138
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2002
|
Check Treatment

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Donnie Helm, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We previously affirmed Movant’s conviction for kidnapping in violation of section 565.110, RSMo 2000. State v. Helm, 14 S.W.3d 642 (Mo. App. E.D.2000). He now contends his counsel provided ineffective assistance by *139failing to impeach the credibility of the State’s key witness.

Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, we conclude the motion court did not clearly err. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum opinion setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Case Details

Case Name: Helm v. State
Court Name: Missouri Court of Appeals
Date Published: Aug 27, 2002
Citation: 84 S.W.3d 138
Docket Number: No. ED 80298
Court Abbreviation: Mo. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.