Ernest v. State
201 S.W.3d 70, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1328, 2006 WL 2597954
Opinion
ORDER
Sir Peter Ernest appeals the motion court’s denial of his motion for post-conviction relief under Missouri Supreme Court Rule 24.035. The court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 30.25(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Ernest v. State, 201 S.W.3d 70, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1328, 2006 WL 2597954 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).
201 S.W.3d 70 (Ernest v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Rhoden
201 S.W.3d 70 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2006)