Case ID: sw3d_535/html/0787-01.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

Melvin PATTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
    ED 105567 & ED 105560
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
    Filed: December 19, 2017
    Gwenda Renee’ Robinson, Missouri Public Defender Office, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for appellant.
    Garrick Aplin, Assistant Attorney General, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for respondent.
    Before Lisa P. Page, P.J., Roy L. Richter, J, and Philip M. Hess, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Melvin Patton (“Movant”) appeals from the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 post-conviction relief motion. Movant contends his trial counsel was ineffective in: (I) failing to request a cautionary instruction concerning the testimony of an in-custody informant, and (II) failing to move for the admission of two newspaper articles that could have been used to impeach the in-custody informant’s testimony. We affirm.

The judgment of the trial court is not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).