Elliot v. State

255 S.W.3d 536, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 805, 2008 WL 2421073
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 17, 2008·No. ED 90561·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ricardo Elliot (“Movant”) appeals the judgment denying his “Motion to Reopen Sua Sponte Inquiry of Fraud and Abandonment Committed Against [Movant] and the Court by [his post-conviction counsel].” We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Elliot v. State, 255 S.W.3d 536, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 805, 2008 WL 2421073 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

255 S.W.3d 536 (Elliot v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Williams
255 S.W.3d 536 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)