Geiger v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Geiger v. State

397 S.W.3d 530, 2013 WL 1615584, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 459

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 16, 2013·No. No. ED 98612·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Clarence Geiger (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 24.035 without an eviden-tiary hearing.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Clarence Geiger (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 24.035 without an eviden-tiary hearing.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Geiger v. State, 397 S.W.3d 530, 2013 WL 1615584, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 459 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

397 S.W.3d 530 (Geiger v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.