Hale v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hale v. State

177 S.W.3d 844, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1500, 2005 WL 2649253

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 18, 2005

DocketED 85362

StatusPublished

This text of 177 S.W.3d 844 (Hale 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

Hale v. State, 177 S.W.3d 844, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1500, 2005 WL 2649253 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

John Hale (Hale) appeals the trial court’s judgment, which denied Hale’s Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence and judgment and request for an evidentiary hearing. The trial court properly found that Hale was not entitled to relief under Rule 29.15. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the Record on Appeal, and we find no error of law in this case. Thus, no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the *845 reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b)(2).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

John Hale (Hale) appeals the trial court’s judgment, which denied Hale’s Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence and judgment and request for an evidentiary hearing. The trial court properly found that Hale was not entitled to relief under Rule 29.15. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the Record on Appeal, and we find no error of law in this case. Thus, no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the *845 reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b)(2).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

177 S.W.3d 844, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1500, 2005 WL 2649253, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hale-v-state-moctapp-2005.