Bolden v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Bolden v. State

571 S.W.3d 699

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bolden v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 541 S.W.3d 715 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 16, 2019·No. No. ED 106734·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jasmine Bolden ("Movant") appeals the motion court's denial of her Rule 24.035 post-conviction relief motion without an evidentiary hearing. Movant offers one point on appeal. Finding that Movant has failed to demonstrate that the motion court clearly erred in denying her Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing, we affirm the judgment of the motion court.

*700No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, we have provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

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

PER CURIAM.

Jasmine Bolden ("Movant") appeals the motion court's denial of her Rule 24.035 post-conviction relief motion without an evidentiary hearing. Movant offers one point on appeal. Finding that Movant has failed to demonstrate that the motion court clearly erred in denying her Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing, we affirm the judgment of the motion court.

*700No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, we have provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

Bolden v. State, 571 S.W.3d 699 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

571 S.W.3d 699 (Bolden v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.