Hargrove v. State

219 S.W.3d 796, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 610, 2007 WL 1120388
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 17, 2007
DocketED 88543
StatusPublished

This text of 219 S.W.3d 796 (Hargrove 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
Hargrove v. State, 219 S.W.3d 796, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 610, 2007 WL 1120388 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

William Hargrove (“Movant”) appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his Rule 29.15 post-conviction relief motion without an evidentiary hearing, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. Movant was convicted by a jury of six counts of statutory sodomy in the first degree, one count of statutory rape in the first degree, and three counts of statutory rape in the second degree. Movant was sentenced to twenty five years’ imprisonment for each count of sodomy and rape in the first degree, and seven years’ imprisonment for each count of statutory rape in the second degree to run concurrently.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the award pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Related

State v. Hoy
219 S.W.3d 796 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
219 S.W.3d 796, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 610, 2007 WL 1120388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hargrove-v-state-moctapp-2007.