Case ID: sw3d_512/html/0840-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Vernando SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    WD 79062
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
    FILED: December 27, 2016
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied January 24, 2017
    Application for Transfer Denied April 4, 2017
    S. Kate Webber, Kansas City for appellant.
    Daniel N. McPherson, Jefferson City for respondent.
    Before Division Two: Lisa White Hardwick, Presiding Judge, Karen King Mitchell and Anthony Rex Gabbert, Judges
   Order

Per Curiam

Vernando Smith appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion after he was convicted of first-degree assault of a law enforcement officer and armed criminal action. Smith contends the motion court clearly erred in denying post-conviction relief because his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call a ballistics expert to testify and his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to assert a claim of pros-ecutorial vindictiveness. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision, because a published opinion would have no precedential value.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b)