Adams v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Adams v. State

399 S.W.3d 504, 2013 WL 2257454, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 625

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Adams v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1113 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 21, 2013·No. No. ED 98834·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Donald Adams appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Donald Adams appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

Adams v. State, 399 S.W.3d 504, 2013 WL 2257454, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 625 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

399 S.W.3d 504 (Adams v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.