Ford v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Ford v. State

534 S.W.3d 922

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 12, 2017

DocketNo. ED 105207

StatusPublished

This text of 534 S.W.3d 922 (Ford 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

Ford v. State, 534 S.W.3d 922 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Billy Joe Ford appeals the judgment, entered after an evidentiary hearing, denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief seeking to vacate his conviction and sentence for first-degree murder. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion 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.

Billy Joe Ford appeals the judgment, entered after an evidentiary hearing, denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief seeking to vacate his conviction and sentence for first-degree murder. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

534 S.W.3d 922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ford-v-state-moctapp-2017.