Cross v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Cross v. State

244 S.W.3d 289, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 180, 2008 WL 314602

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 5, 2008

DocketWD 67680

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 244 S.W.3d 289 (Cross 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

Cross v. State, 244 S.W.3d 289, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 180, 2008 WL 314602 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

*290 Order

PER CURIAM.

Jeffrey D. Cross appeals the denial of his post-conviction motion to vacate his guilty plea to statutory rape, statutory sodomy, and incest. After an evidentiary hearing, the motion court denied Cross’s motion. Cross claims on appeal that the motion court’s judgment is clearly erroneous and violated his constitutional rights to effective assistance of counsel and to due process of law. The motion court’s findings of fact are not clearly erroneous and we affirm the judgment.

Rule 84.16(b).

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

*290 Order

PER CURIAM.

Jeffrey D. Cross appeals the denial of his post-conviction motion to vacate his guilty plea to statutory rape, statutory sodomy, and incest. After an evidentiary hearing, the motion court denied Cross’s motion. Cross claims on appeal that the motion court’s judgment is clearly erroneous and violated his constitutional rights to effective assistance of counsel and to due process of law. The motion court’s findings of fact are not clearly erroneous and we affirm the judgment.

Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 S.W.3d 289, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 180, 2008 WL 314602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cross-v-state-moctapp-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack