Missouri Court of Appeals, 2000

Wader v. State

Wader v. State
Missouri Court of Appeals · Decided March 7, 2000 · Crandall, Crist, Hoff
16 S.W.3d 683; 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 337; 2000 WL 249201 (South Western Reporter, Third Series)

Wader v. State

Opinion of the Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jerry Wader (Movant) appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. Movant argues he was denied effective assistance of counsel because: (1) he was not allowed to testify; and (2) trial counsel failed properly to investigate and call JoAnn Ripple to testify on Movant’s behalf.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15.(k). An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential value. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.