Crawford v. State

200 S.W.3d 560, 2006 WL 2529500
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Crawford v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 609
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 5, 2006·No. ED 86839·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Deangelo Crawford (Movant) appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 1 motion for post-conviction relief (Motion) following an evidentiary hearing.

We affirmed Movant’s conviction and sentence for first-degree murder, first-degree robbery, and armed criminal action in State v. Crawford, 139 S.W.3d 606 (Mo.App. E.D.2004). This appeal follows the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law denying Movant’s Motion without an evidentiary hearing.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. The motion court’s find *561 ings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). No error of law appeal’s. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2005, unless otherwise indicated.

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

Crawford v. State, 200 S.W.3d 560, 2006 WL 2529500 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

200 S.W.3d 560 (Crawford v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Crawford
139 S.W.3d 606 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2004)