Garner v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Garner v. State

75 S.W.3d 315, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 1009, 2002 WL 977169

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Garner v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 2214 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 14, 2002·No. No. ED 79486·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Travis Garner, appeals from the judgment denying on the merits his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s judgment is not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum for the use of the parties only 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.

Movant, Travis Garner, appeals from the judgment denying on the merits his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s judgment is not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Garner v. State, 75 S.W.3d 315, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 1009, 2002 WL 977169 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

75 S.W.3d 315 (Garner v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.