JUSTIN DONOVAN v. STATE OF MISSOURI (2024)

ORDER

Justin Donovan (“Donovan”) appeals the motion court's judgment overruling his Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Donovan raises one Point on Appeal, arguing the motion court clearly erred in denying his Claim 8(a) because he was denied effective assistance of counsel. He claims his trial counsel's performance fell below the objective standards of reasonable competence, and he was thereby prejudiced, when trial counsel failed to advise him to waive jury sentencing because trial counsel was unprepared to present evidence at jury sentencing. Donovan asserts that but for trial counsel's ineffectiveness, there was a reasonable probability of a different sentencing outcome, as it was reasonably probable that Donovan would have waived jury sentencing had trial counsel advised him to do so, and he would have received a lower sentence. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, we have provided an unpublished memorandum which sets forth the reasons for this order. Rule 84.16(b).

PER CURIUM: