{"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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"forrest-d-russell","displayName":"Forrest D. Russell","totalCases":1},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappd:ed112090:2024-08-27","opinionId":"0d163845-cff9-552f-82ff-3e85746002bd","slug":"forrest-d-russell-appellant-v-state-of-missouri-respondent-112090","caseName":"Forrest D. Russell, Appellant, vs. State of Missouri, Respondent.","caseNumber":"ED112090","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":"2024-08-27","year":2024,"display_summary":"Forrest D. Russell appealed the motion court's denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, arguing his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present evidence of an alternate perpetrator. The motion court found that counsel's strategy of mistaken identity was reasonable and that the proposed alternate perpetrator evidence would likely have been inadmissible. The appellate court affirmed the motion court's judgment, concluding that trial counsel's performance was not ineffective.","primaryTopic":"criminal-procedure","topicSlugs":["criminal-procedure","appellate-procedure","evidence","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=210896","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/forrest-d-russell-appellant-v-state-of-missouri-respondent-112090","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":36,"source":"tag","evidence":["tag: criminal-law","topic: criminal-procedure","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"}]}