Case Name: Joshua WYBLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2010-09-14
Citations: 326 S.W.3d 95
Docket Number: No. WD 71173
Parties: Joshua WYBLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before Division I: JAMES M. SMART, JR., Presiding Judge, and MARK D. PFEIFFER and CYNTHIA L. MARTIN, Judges.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 326
Pages: 95–96

Head Matter:
Joshua WYBLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.
No. WD 71173.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Sept. 14, 2010.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Nov. 2, 2010.
Application for Transfer Denied Dec. 21, 2010.
Susan L. Hogan, Appellate Defender, Kansas City, MO, for Appellant.
Chris Koster, Attorney General, Karen L. Kramer, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
Before Division I: JAMES M. SMART, JR., Presiding Judge, and MARK D. PFEIFFER and CYNTHIA L. MARTIN, Judges.

Opinion:
Order
PER CURIAM:
Joshua Wyble ("Wyble") appeals the Circuit Court of DeKalb County's ("motion court") judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion to vacate his conviction of first-degree statutory sodomy, section 566.062. Wyble contends that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion for post-conviction relief because his trial counsel failed to act as a reasonably competent attorney. More specifically, Wyble argues that his trial counsel (1) failed to timely object to certain hearsay testimony; (2) failed to assert, in the motion for new trial, that the admission of hearsay statements violated Wyble's right to confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him; and (3) wrongfully opened the door for testimony that was non-responsive, irrelevant, and misleading. We disagree and affirm the motion court's judgment in this per curiam order and have provided the parties a memorandum explaining our ruling. Rule 84.16(b).