Goodson v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Goodson v. State

352 S.W.3d 679, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1537, 2011 WL 5553698

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 15, 2011

DocketED 96118

StatusPublished

This text of 352 S.W.3d 679 (Goodson 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

Goodson v. State, 352 S.W.3d 679, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1537, 2011 WL 5553698 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jeremy Goodson (Movant) appeals from the circuit court’s judgment denying, after an evidentiary hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief.

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.

Jeremy Goodson (Movant) appeals from the circuit court’s judgment denying, after an evidentiary hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief.

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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

352 S.W.3d 679, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1537, 2011 WL 5553698, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goodson-v-state-moctapp-2011.