Dickens v. State
297 S.W.3d 673, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1677, 2009 WL 4545096
Opinion
ORDER
Movant, Timothy Dickens, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing.
The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dickens v. State, 297 S.W.3d 673, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1677, 2009 WL 4545096 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).
297 S.W.3d 673 (Dickens v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
NOWDEN v. State
297 S.W.3d 673 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2009)