Butler v. State

285 S.W.3d 823, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 866, 2009 WL 1758897
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Butler v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 898
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 23, 2009·No. ED 91322·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kevin Butler appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Butler v. State, 285 S.W.3d 823, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 866, 2009 WL 1758897 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

285 S.W.3d 823 (Butler v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dantzson v. State
285 S.W.3d 823 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2009)