DIXON v. STATE (2024)

ORDER

Rex Aaron Dixon appeals from the denial, after an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Dixon raises five points on appeal, all challenging the effectiveness of his trial counsel. Dixon claims that trial counsel was ineffective in (1) failing to adduce evidence from a qualified forensic child interview expert regarding the reliability of Victim's statements made during the interview; (2) failing to adduce evidence from a qualified expert medical witness that Dixon's erectile dysfunction made the underlying offense impossible for him to commit; (3) failing to object to the State's closing argument when the prosecutor argued that Victim was telling the truth because it amounted to vouching, bolstering, and personalization; (4) failing to investigate and present character witnesses regarding Dixon's good character and reputation for truthfulness; and (5) failing to investigate and obtain Victim's juvenile, school, medical, counseling, and hospital records to impeach Victim's credibility. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Per Curiam: