STEPHAN v. STATE (2024)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

William Alfred STEPHAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

WD 85891

Decided: March 19, 2024

Before Division Two: Anthony Rex Gabbert, Presiding Judge, and Karen King Mitchell and Janet Sutton, Judges

John Esposito, Assistant Public Defender, Kansas City, MO, Attorney for Appellant. Andrew Bailey, Attorney General, and Abigail M. Meharg, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, Attorneys for Respondent.

Order

William Stephan appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 ¹ motion for post-conviction relief. Stephan raises two points on appeal, both claiming that the motion court erred in finding Stephan was not denied the effective assistance of counsel. First, he argues that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to object to testimony from a child play therapist regarding whether the responses given by the child victim (Victim) appeared to have been coached and whether Victim appeared to be competent. Second, Stephan argues that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to investigate and retain an expert to testify on the process of disclosure of abuse by a child and the suggestibility of a child witness. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

FOOTNOTES

1. All rule references are to the Missouri Supreme Court Rules (2022), unless otherwise noted.

Per Curiam:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network