Fuller v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Fuller v. State

361 S.W.3d 22, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1273, 2011 WL 4444068

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 27, 2011

DocketWD 72705

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 361 S.W.3d 22 (Fuller 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

Fuller v. State, 361 S.W.3d 22, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1273, 2011 WL 4444068 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

361 S.W.3d 22, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1273, 2011 WL 4444068, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fuller-v-state-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack