Anderson v. State

326 S.W.3d 552, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1658, 2010 WL 4772699
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Anderson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 993
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 23, 2010·No. ED 93748·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Earl Anderson (Movant) appeals from the judgment of the St. Charles County Circuit Court denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant contends the motion court erred in denying his motion for post-conviction relief after a hearing because the motion court had no authority to vacate or amend the amended judgment and sentence entered on October 17, 2007.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties 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

Anderson v. State, 326 S.W.3d 552, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1658, 2010 WL 4772699 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

326 S.W.3d 552 (Anderson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.