Clark v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Clark v. State

547 S.W.3d 161

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 15, 2018

DocketNo. ED 105375

StatusPublished

This text of 547 S.W.3d 161 (Clark 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

Clark v. State, 547 S.W.3d 161 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Antonieo D. Clark appeals from a judgment denying his Mo. Sup. Ct. Rule 29.15 (2014) amended motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claim of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Mo. Sup. Ct. Rule 84.16(b) (2018).

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

PER CURIAM.

Antonieo D. Clark appeals from a judgment denying his Mo. Sup. Ct. Rule 29.15 (2014) amended motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claim of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Mo. Sup. Ct. Rule 84.16(b) (2018).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

547 S.W.3d 161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clark-v-state-moctapp-2018.