Narrative Opinion Summary
Lawrence Frazee was convicted of first-degree robbery after a bench trial in the Circuit Court of Clay County and sentenced to twenty-five years in prison, to run concurrently with another felony sentence. Frazee subsequently filed a motion for post-conviction relief under Supreme Court Rule 29.15, which was denied by the circuit court after an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, Frazee claimed ineffective assistance of trial counsel for not calling mental health professionals as mitigation witnesses during sentencing. The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's decision, stating that a published opinion would not provide precedential value and issued an unpublished memorandum detailing the reasons for the order, in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
Legal Issues Addressed
Ineffective Assistance of Counselsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court considered the claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel based on the failure to call mental health professionals as mitigation witnesses during sentencing.
Reasoning: On appeal, Frazee claimed ineffective assistance of trial counsel for not calling mental health professionals as mitigation witnesses during sentencing.
Post-Conviction Relief under Supreme Court Rule 29.15subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Frazee filed for post-conviction relief under Rule 29.15, but his motion was denied by the circuit court after an evidentiary hearing.
Reasoning: Frazee subsequently filed a motion for post-conviction relief under Supreme Court Rule 29.15, which was denied by the circuit court after an evidentiary hearing.
Unpublished Memorandum under Rule 84.16(b)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court issued an unpublished memorandum explaining its decision, as it deemed a published opinion would not have precedential value.
Reasoning: The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's decision, stating that a published opinion would not provide precedential value and issued an unpublished memorandum detailing the reasons for the order, in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).