Costello v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Costello v. State

527 S.W.3d 185, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 840, 2017 WL 3707472

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 29, 2017·No. No. ED 105085·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Keith Costello appeals from the judgment of the circuit court denying, without an evidentiary hearing, his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 29.15, Finding no error, we affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Keith Costello appeals from the judgment of the circuit court denying, without an evidentiary hearing, his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 29.15, Finding no error, we affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Costello v. State, 527 S.W.3d 185, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 840, 2017 WL 3707472 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

527 S.W.3d 185 (Costello v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.