Hawkins v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hawkins v. State

116 S.W.3d 660, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 1270, 2003 WL 21910931

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 12, 2003

DocketED 82030

StatusPublished

This text of 116 S.W.3d 660 (Hawkins 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

Hawkins v. State, 116 S.W.3d 660, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 1270, 2003 WL 21910931 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Nathan Hawkins appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that the determination of the motion court is not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would be of no precedential value. We affirm the judgment for the reasons set forth in the motion court’s comprehensive findings of fact and conclusions of law. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Nathan Hawkins appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that the determination of the motion court is not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would be of no precedential value. We affirm the judgment for the reasons set forth in the motion court’s comprehensive findings of fact and conclusions of law. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

116 S.W.3d 660, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 1270, 2003 WL 21910931, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hawkins-v-state-moctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack