Beck v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Beck v. State

380 S.W.3d 614, 2012 WL 4078922, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1158

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 18, 2012·No. No. ED 97816·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Harriston Beck (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 24.035 without an evidentiary hearing.

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 opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Harriston Beck (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 24.035 without an evidentiary hearing.

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 opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Beck v. State, 380 S.W.3d 614, 2012 WL 4078922, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1158 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

380 S.W.3d 614 (Beck v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.