Geiler v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Geiler v. State

950 S.W.2d 241, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 1186, 1997 WL 351785

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Geiler v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 398 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 27, 1997·No. No. 71447·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Terry Geiler (“Movant”) appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion following an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claim of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. 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. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Terry Geiler (“Movant”) appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion following an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claim of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. 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. Rule 84.16(b).

Geiler v. State, 950 S.W.2d 241, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 1186, 1997 WL 351785 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

950 S.W.2d 241 (Geiler v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.