Birdno v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Birdno v. State

517 S.W.3d 677, 2017 WL 1881132, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 399

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 9, 2017

DocketNo. ED 103610

StatusPublished

This text of 517 S.W.3d 677 (Birdno 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

Birdno v. State, 517 S.W.3d 677, 2017 WL 1881132, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 399 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jason Birdno appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We find no clear error in the motion court’s findings and conclusions. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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.

Jason Birdno appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We find no clear error in the motion court’s findings and conclusions. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

517 S.W.3d 677, 2017 WL 1881132, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 399, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/birdno-v-state-moctapp-2017.