Vicente Roldan-Marron Missouri Cases

Vicente Roldan-Marron appealed the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, asserting ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to investigate and retain a forensic psychologist regarding his mental state at the time of his offenses. The appellate court affirmed the motion court's judgment. It held that Roldan-Marron's claim was waived because the specific mental condition presented at the evidentiary hearing differed from that alleged in his amended motion. Alternatively, the court found the claim lacked merit, concluding that trial counsel's strategic decision to pursue a "sudden passion" defense was reasonable, especially given the expert's inability to definitively state Roldan-Marron was unable to deliberate due to intoxication.