Bates v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Bates v. State

528 S.W.3d 40

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 6, 2017·No. ED 104383·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Rickey Bates (“Movant”) appeals from the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 post-conviction relief motion. We affirm.

The judgment of the trial court is not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Rickey Bates (“Movant”) appeals from the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 post-conviction relief motion. We affirm.

The judgment of the trial court is not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Bates v. State, 528 S.W.3d 40 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

528 S.W.3d 40 (Bates v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.