Davis v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Davis v. State

4 S.W.3d 595, 1999 Mo. App. LEXIS 2015, 1999 WL 809536

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 12, 1999·No. No. ED 75837·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant Harold Davis appeals from the judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 24.035. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court’s determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. 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.

Movant Harold Davis appeals from the judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 24.035. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court’s determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Davis v. State, 4 S.W.3d 595, 1999 Mo. App. LEXIS 2015, 1999 WL 809536 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

4 S.W.3d 595 (Davis v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.