Fuller v. State
361 S.W.3d 22, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1273, 2011 WL 4444068
Opinion
ORDER
George Fuller appeals from the motion court’s denial of his motion to reopen his Rule 29.15 post-conviction case. On appeal, Fuller claims that he was entitled to reopen the Rule 29.15 proceedings because he was abandoned by counsel. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.
The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Fuller v. State, 361 S.W.3d 22, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1273, 2011 WL 4444068 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).
361 S.W.3d 22 (Fuller v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Fuller v. Partee
540 S.W.3d 864 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2018)
George Fuller v. State of Missouri
485 S.W.3d 768 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2016)