BOWZER v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

BOWZER v. State

219 S.W.3d 783, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 562, 2007 WL 1052667

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 10, 2007

DocketED 87615

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 219 S.W.3d 783 (BOWZER 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

BOWZER v. State, 219 S.W.3d 783, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 562, 2007 WL 1052667 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James Bowzer appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James Bowzer appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

219 S.W.3d 783, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 562, 2007 WL 1052667, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowzer-v-state-moctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack