Evans v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Evans v. State

525 S.W.3d 216, 2017 WL 3597019

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 22, 2017

DocketNo. ED 104694

StatusPublished

This text of 525 S.W.3d 216 (Evans 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

Evans v. State, 525 S.W.3d 216, 2017 WL 3597019 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Nicholas' A. Evans appeals from the motion court’s “Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Judgment Denying Movant’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct the Judgment and Sentence,” following an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential or precedential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use. of the parties 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

Nicholas' A. Evans appeals from the motion court’s “Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Judgment Denying Movant’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct the Judgment and Sentence,” following an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential or precedential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use. of the parties setting, forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the Judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

525 S.W.3d 216, 2017 WL 3597019, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/evans-v-state-moctapp-2017.