Alford v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Alford v. State

209 S.W.3d 51, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1939, 2006 WL 3718006

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 19, 2006·No. No. ED 87542·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Vincent L. Alford, appeals from the judgment denying on the merits without an evidentiary hearing his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court’s judgment is based on findings of facts and conclusions of law that are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the [52] parties only, setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Vincent L. Alford, appeals from the judgment denying on the merits without an evidentiary hearing his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court’s judgment is based on findings of facts and conclusions of law that are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the [52] parties only, setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Alford v. State, 209 S.W.3d 51, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1939, 2006 WL 3718006 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

209 S.W.3d 51 (Alford v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.