Paden v. State
Paden v. State
298 S.W.3d 119; 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1280; 2009 WL 2922846
(South Western Reporter, Third Series)
Paden v. State
Opinion
ORDER
Jermaine Paden appeals the circuit court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, Paden claims that the circuit court clearly erred in denying his motion because his trial attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.
The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.