Missouri Court of Appeals· 7/25/2003
Matney v. State
Citations
- 110 S.W.3d 872
- 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 1154
- 2003 WL 21731158
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding movant was not entitled to post-conviction DNA testing, in part, because the decision of trial counsel to forgo DNA testing was reasonable trial strategy in light of the fact said evidence was likely not exculpatory
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: James K. Prewitt
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
6 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Hudson v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals· 2006-03-28· cited 7×
- State of Missouri v. Ardell FieldsMissouri Court of Appeals· 2016-07-19· cited 5×
- Belcher v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals· 2012-02-07· cited 4×
- State of Missouri v. Patricia PrewittMissouri Court of Appeals· 2019-05-21· cited 3×
- State v. BelcherMissouri Court of Appeals· 2010-05-13· cited 2×
- State of Missouri v. Fred L. HarrisMissouri Court of Appeals· 2021-03-23
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. ErvinSupreme Court of Missouri· 1992-09-22· cited 246×
- Rousan v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri· 2001-05-15· cited 67×
- Self v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals· 2000-02-10· cited 10×
- State v. MatneyMissouri Court of Appeals· 1998-11-16· cited 10×
- Snowdell v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals· 2002-11-05· cited 8×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.