Opinion

Sanders v. State

  • 738 S.W.2d 856
  • 1987 Mo. LEXIS 344
Court
Supreme Court of Missouri
Filed
Oct 13, 1987
Status
Published
Author
Donnelly
On the bench
Billings, Robertson, Rendlen, Higgins, Blackmar, Donnelly, Welliver
Cited by
610 cases
Authority
More cited than 7.9%

finding that counsel’s decision not to conduct further interviews with a potential witness was reasonable and that the movant was not prejudiced

How later courts described this case

  • finding that counsel’s decision not to conduct further interviews with a potential witness was reasonable and that the movant was not prejudiced
  • noting that defendant's burden to overcome the presumption of effectiveness is heavy
  • noting that a movant’s burden to overcome the presumption of effectiveness is heavy
  • “The selection of witnesses and the introduction of evidence are questions of trial strategy and the mere choice of trial strategy is not a foundation for finding ineffective assistance of counsel.”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

DONNELLY, Judge,

dissenting.

The Constitution of Missouri provides “[t]hat in criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right to appear and defend, in person and by counsel * * Mo. Const, art. I, § 18(a) (emphasis added). This constitutional provision was intended to assure a person accused in Missouri “that fair and impartial trial guaranteed by the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and laws of our State.” State v. Bunton, 312 Mo. 655, 662 , 280 S.W. 1040, 1042 (1926). 1

The essential issue in this case is whether appellant was accorded a fair and impartial trial.

I would reverse the judgment and remand the cause with directions that the trial judge review the transcript of the trial, consider the evidence adduced at the evidentiary hearing, and, on the basis of all the facts and circumstances of the case, decide the issue by stating only whether, in his opinion, the accused was denied a fair and impartial trial. If aggrieved by that determination, the accused could appeal and the entire record could again be reviewed and a decision rendered as to whether the conclusion of the trial judge was clearly erroneous.

I respectfully dissent.

. This right has been protected in Missouri since its territorial days. See Digest of the Laws of the Missouri Territory, 1818, Crimes and Misdemeanors, § 35.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.