{"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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"rodger-sisemore","displayName":"Rodger Sisemore","totalCases":1},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappwd:wd87891:undated","opinionId":"ae52c71d-30e0-5855-be2b-287d9b2c08a7","slug":"rodger-sisemore-v-state-of-missouri-d87891","caseName":"Rodger Sisemore\nvs. \nState of Missouri","caseNumber":"WD87891","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":null,"year":2026,"display_summary":"Rodger Sisemore appealed the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, arguing his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to contact and call two witnesses. Sisemore claimed these witnesses would have testified that he did not know the victim and that the victim and his mother had a reputation for untruthfulness. The motion court denied the claim after an evidentiary hearing, and the appellate court affirmed, finding no clear error. The appellate court also addressed the untimeliness of Sisemore's amended motion but proceeded to the merits.","primaryTopic":"criminal-procedure","topicSlugs":["criminal-procedure","appellate-procedure","evidence"],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=231275","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/rodger-sisemore-v-state-of-missouri-d87891","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"}]}