FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF IRON COUNTY Honorable Kelly W.
2011, a jury found Daniel Boone Wadlow ("Movant")
guilty of statutory sodomy in the first degree, and the trial
court imposed a life-sentence. See section
566.062. We affirmed Defendant's judgment of
conviction and sentence on direct appeal in State v.
Wadlow, 370 S.W.3d 315, 323 (Mo. App. S.D. 2012).
now appeals the subsequent denial, after an evidentiary
hearing, of his amended Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion to
vacate his conviction and sentence ("the amended
motion") -- a decision we review to determine whether
the findings of fact and conclusions of law supporting the
decision are clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k); Moore v.
State, 328 S.W.3d 700, 702 (Mo. banc 2010).
two points claim, respectively, that the motion court clearly
erred because Movant proved his lawyer ("trial
counsel") was ineffective in: (1) failing "to move
to strike venireperson [number 7 ("Juror 3")]"
after Juror 3 disclosed "that she could not be fair due
to having a young granddaughter herself"; and (2)
failing to object to questions the State asked a trial
witness about "violence toward [Movant's] son, and
statements [the witness] allegedly made to police about abuse
between [Movant] and [his ex-wife.]"
merit in Movant's first point, we must reverse the motion
court's denial of post-conviction relief and vacate
Movant's underlying judgment of conviction and
voir dire, the prosecutor informed the venire panel
that "[t]he victim in this case -- was at the time, back
in February of 2009, a five year old girl[.]" He then
engaged in the following exchange:
Q. Let me ask, due to the nature of this case is there anyone
who feels that they would not be able to be fair and
impartial simply due to the nature of the charges of this
case? Please raise your hand
Q. Thank you. Can you raise your hands again if there was
anybody that felt they might not be able to be fair or
impartial in this case? [Juror 3]?
[Juror 3]: Yes. I have a granddaughter that's four years
old and I just truly don't think that I could do it, to
be honest, to be fair about it.
Q. Would you be able to listen to the evidence and make a
decision just based on that evidence?
[Juror 3]: No.
Q. Thank you. [The prosecutor then questioned other members