Case ID: sw3d_527/html/0126-01.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

Kurt M. BOHONSKY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    WD 79969
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
    Filed: August 29, 2017
    Margaret M. Johnston and Casey A. Taylor, Assistant Public Defenders, Columbia, MO, for Appellant.
    Joshua D. Hawley, Attorney General, and Shaun J. Mackelprang, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
    Before Division One: James E. Welsh, Presiding Judge, Lisa White Hardwick and Gary D. Witt, Judges
   Order

Per Curiam

Kurt Bohonsky appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief.’ He contends the motion court erred in denying his claim that plea counsel was ineffective because the court applied the incorrect standard in reviewing his claim for ineffective assistance of plea counsel. For reasons explained in a Memorandum provided to the parties, we find no error and affirm the motion court’s judgment.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).