Carter v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Carter v. State

14 S.W.3d 665, 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 415, 2000 WL 291148

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Carter v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 372 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 21, 2000·No. No. ED 76531·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Michael Carter, appeals the denial on the merits of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentia-ry hearing. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Michael Carter, appeals the denial on the merits of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentia-ry hearing. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential 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).

Carter v. State, 14 S.W.3d 665, 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 415, 2000 WL 291148 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

14 S.W.3d 665 (Carter v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.