Cochran v. State
James LeRoy COCHRAN v. STATE of Missouri
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
CLEMENS, Judge.
Movant appeals the denial of his second Rule 27.26 motion. He seeks to set aside his conviction and ten-year sentence for armed robbery.
Movant’s first two grounds concern denial of his right to a speedy trial and failure to produce a police report at his trial. Both points were raised and denied *711 on his direct appeal. See State v. Cochran, 366 S.W.2d 360 [1, 2] (Mo.1963). They cannot be reconsidered in this post-conviction proceeding. Sweazea v. State, 515 S.W.2d 499 [1] (Mo.1974).
Movant’s last three grounds concern identification testimony, cross examination of witnesses and jury instructions. These grounds not only concern trial errors but could have been raised in movant’s earlier Rule 27.26 motion filed and denied in 1970. Movant is thus doubly precluded from raising these three grounds in a collateral attack on his conviction. Brown v. State, 492 S.W.2d 762 [4] (Mo.1973); Newman v. State, 481 S.W.2d 3 [1] (Mo.1972).
Judgment affirmed.
WEIER, P. J., and DOWD, J., concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.