{"disclaimer":"This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"derick-t-davis","displayName":"Derick T. Davis","totalCases":1},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappwd:wd83193:2020-11-10","opinionId":"0ca289d7-2608-5e10-9a69-d0ff5cfff8d4","slug":"derick-t-davis-v-state-of-missouri-d83193","caseName":"Derick T. Davis\nvs. \nState of Missouri","caseNumber":"WD83193","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":"2020-11-10","year":2020,"display_summary":"Derik T. Davis appealed the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. He claimed trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to a prosecutor's comment on his failure to testify, and appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising a Confrontation Clause issue regarding expert testimony. The appellate court affirmed the motion court's denial, finding no prejudice from trial counsel's failure to object and that the Confrontation Clause claim lacked merit.","primaryTopic":"criminal-procedure","topicSlugs":["criminal-procedure","appellate-procedure","evidence","search-and-seizure"],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=168994","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/derick-t-davis-v-state-of-missouri-d83193","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":36,"source":"tag","evidence":["tag: criminal-law","topic: criminal-procedure","topic: search-and-seizure","text: state of missouri","text: conviction"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: evidence","topic: appellate-procedure"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"appellant"}]}