{"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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"robert-f-seaton","displayName":"Robert F. Seaton","totalCases":1},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappwd:wd83787:2021-06-29","opinionId":"5b32cf9c-b4e1-59dc-b60e-8d24b8582a41","slug":"state-of-missouri-v-robert-f-seaton-d83787","caseName":"State of Missouri\nvs. \nRobert F. Seaton","caseNumber":"WD83787","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":"2021-06-29","year":2021,"display_summary":"Robert F. Seaton appealed the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Seaton claimed counsel failed to object to a video interview where he invoked his right to remain silent, arguing it constituted a Doyle violation and prejudiced him. The motion court found counsel had a reasonable trial strategy and that no Doyle violation occurred, thus denying relief. The appellate court affirmed, concluding that Seaton failed to establish prejudice and that the video segment did not create an impermissible inference of guilt.","primaryTopic":"criminal-procedure","topicSlugs":["criminal-procedure","appellate-procedure","evidence","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=178218","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/state-of-missouri-v-robert-f-seaton-d83787","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":32,"source":"tag","evidence":["tag: criminal-law","topic: criminal-procedure"],"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":"respondent"}]}