Gordon v. State

157 S.W.3d 374, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 406, 2005 WL 525223
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedMarch 8, 2005
DocketED 84603
StatusPublished

This text of 157 S.W.3d 374 (Gordon 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
Gordon v. State, 157 S.W.3d 374, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 406, 2005 WL 525223 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Darius Gordon appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentia-ry hearing. He contends the motion court clearly erred in denying his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, we conclude the motion court did not clearly err. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
157 S.W.3d 374, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 406, 2005 WL 525223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gordon-v-state-moctapp-2005.