Home/Missouri Court of Appeals/Barr v. State

Barr v. State

228 S.W.3d 38, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 879, 2007 WL 1673560
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 12, 2007
DocketED 87297
StatusPublished

This text of 228 S.W.3d 38 (Barr 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
Barr v. State, 228 S.W.3d 38, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 879, 2007 WL 1673560 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Billy J. Barr, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, movant argues that his plea counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to inform him that a court ordered program would cost $225.00.

The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Related

STOTTLE v. State
228 S.W.3d 38 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
228 S.W.3d 38, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 879, 2007 WL 1673560, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barr-v-state-moctapp-2007.