Anderson v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Anderson v. State

485 S.W.3d 826, 2016 WL 1469978, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 338

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 12, 2016

DocketNo. ED 102777

StatusPublished

This text of 485 S.W.3d 826 (Anderson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Anderson v. State, 485 S.W.3d 826, 2016 WL 1469978, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 338 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Alfred T. Anderson appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his Rule 24.035¹ motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and, conclude the findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k), Hymes v. State, 466 S.W.3d 677, 679 (Mo. App. E.D. 2015). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Alfred T. Anderson appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his Rule 24.035¹ motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and, conclude the findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k), Hymes v. State, 466 S.W.3d 677, 679 (Mo. App. E.D. 2015). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

485 S.W.3d 826, 2016 WL 1469978, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 338, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-state-moctapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack