Dean v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Dean v. State

352 S.W.3d 680, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1541, 2011 WL 5553704

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 15, 2011

DocketED 96290

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 352 S.W.3d 680 (Dean 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

Dean v. State, 352 S.W.3d 680, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1541, 2011 WL 5553704 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Tavis Dean appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying Dean’s request for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Tavis Dean appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying Dean’s request for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

352 S.W.3d 680, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1541, 2011 WL 5553704, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dean-v-state-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack