Case ID: sw2d_967/html/0725-01.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

STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Hubert HOLMES, Appellant.
    Nos. WD 52081, WD 54502.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
    June 2, 1998.
    Kent Denzel, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for Appellant.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Seth A. Albín, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for Respondent.
    Before ELLIS, P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and RIEDERER, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant-Movant was convicted of robbery first degree, armed criminal action, resisting arrest, and possession of a controlled substance. On direct appeal he seeks reversal, under plain error, for the prosecutor’s closing argument. In his Rule 29.15 appeal he asserts counsel was incompetent for failure to object in closing argument, and for failing to seek a change of venue based on pretrial publicity. Judgments affirmed. Rule 30.25(b) and Rule 84.16(b).