Crusoe v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Crusoe v. State

302 S.W.3d 783, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 420, 2010 WL 572865

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 2, 2010

DocketNo. ED 92165

StatusPublished

This text of 302 S.W.3d 783 (Crusoe 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

Crusoe v. State, 302 S.W.3d 783, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 420, 2010 WL 572865 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Eli L. Crusoe, Jr. appeals from the motion court’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment denying his Rule 24.035¹ Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct the Judgment and Sentence without an evidentiary hearing.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. The find-[784]*784tags and conclusions of the motion court are based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth.the facts and reasons for this order.

We affirm 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.

Eli L. Crusoe, Jr. appeals from the motion court’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment denying his Rule 24.035¹ Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct the Judgment and Sentence without an evidentiary hearing.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. The find-[784]*784tags and conclusions of the motion court are based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth.the facts and reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

302 S.W.3d 783, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 420, 2010 WL 572865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crusoe-v-state-moctapp-2010.