Coffman v. State, 330 S.W.3d 767 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010). · Go Syfert
Search
Coffman v. State, 330 S.W.3d 767 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Herbert Morrison v. Karen Goodwin, City Clerk for the City of Florissant, Missouri (moctapp, 2023-05-16)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Herbert Morrison v. Karen Goodwin, City Clerk for the City of Florissant, Missouri
Mo. Ct. App. · 2023 · confidence medium
Charles Cnty., 614 S.W.3d 582 , 591 (Mo. App. E.D. 2020) (noting a business’s “filing of its [conditional use permit] application did not confer upon it a vested right to a particular zoning procedure scheme”); Lamar Co., LLC v. City of Kansas City, 330 S.W.3d 767, 771 (Mo. App. 8 W.D. 2010) (concluding that an application for a billboard permit under a prior ordinance does not establish a vested right); State ex rel.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Koelkebeck v. Director of Revenue of State
Mo. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
Lamar Co., LLC v. City of Kansas City, 330 S.W.3d 767, 771 (Mo.App.
cited Cited as authority (rule) T.C.T. v. Shafinia
Mo. Ct. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
Lamar Co., LLC v. City of Kansas City, 330 S.W.3d 767, 771 (Mo.App.
cited Cited "see" Neighborhood Enterprises, Inc. v. City of St. Louis
E.D. Mo. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Lamar Company, LLC v. City of Kansas City, 330 S.W.3d 767, 773 (Mo.App.W.D.2010) (“Respondent [holds] its property subject at all times to every valid exercise of the police power.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Daniel COFFMAN, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent
WD 71466.
Missouri Court of Appeals.
Nov 9, 2010.
330 S.W.3d 767
2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1503
2010 WL 4449094
Emmett D. Queener, Columbia, MO, for appellant., Shaun J. Mackelprang and Jamie P. Rasmussen, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Ahuja, Howard, Martin.
Published

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Daniel Coffman appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. Coffman contends that his trial counsel was ineffective in: (1) failing to call police officer Joseph Jackson as a witness at trial; (2) failing to call Goldina McKnight and Dr. Steven Scott to testify at trial; (3) failing to call criminalist Shawn Bailes as a witness at trial; and (4) conceding in closing argument that the victim had not consented to sexual intercourse with Coffman. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).