Bateman v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Bateman v. State

539 S.W.3d 47

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 10, 2017·No. No. ED 104515·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Tyrone Bateman ("Movant") appeals from the motion court's judgment, following an evidentiary hearing, denying Movant's claims in a Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for *48their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

PER CURIAM

Tyrone Bateman ("Movant") appeals from the motion court's judgment, following an evidentiary hearing, denying Movant's claims in a Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for *48their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Bateman v. State, 539 S.W.3d 47 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

539 S.W.3d 47 (Bateman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.