Askew v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Askew v. State

241 S.W.3d 454, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1744, 2007 WL 4481125

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 26, 2007·No. WD 67114·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Askew appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion, following an evi-dentiary hearing. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the motion court’s judgment. We *455 have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our de- . cisión, because a published opinion would have no precedential value.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Askew appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion, following an evi-dentiary hearing. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the motion court’s judgment. We *455 have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our de- . cisión, because a published opinion would have no precedential value.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Askew v. State, 241 S.W.3d 454, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1744, 2007 WL 4481125 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

241 S.W.3d 454 (Askew v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.