Fox v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Fox v. State

544 S.W.3d 701

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 17, 2018

DocketED 105552

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 544 S.W.3d 701 (Fox 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

Fox v. State, 544 S.W.3d 701 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Joseph L. Fox appeals from the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order (judgment) of the motion court denying his Rule 24.035¹ motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the motion court's findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k); Little v. State, 427 S.W.3d 846, 850 (Mo. App. E.D. 2014). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

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

PER CURIAM.

Joseph L. Fox appeals from the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order (judgment) of the motion court denying his Rule 24.035¹ motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the motion court's findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k); Little v. State, 427 S.W.3d 846, 850 (Mo. App. E.D. 2014). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

544 S.W.3d 701, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fox-v-state-moctapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack