Hegwood v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hegwood v. State

510 S.W.3d 901, 2017 WL 676737

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 21, 2017·No. No. ED 103862·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Quitman Hegwood appeals from the judgment of the circuit court denying, after an evidentiary hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Finding no error, we affirm.

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

Quitman Hegwood appeals from the judgment of the circuit court denying, after an evidentiary hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Finding no error, we affirm.

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).

Hegwood v. State, 510 S.W.3d 901, 2017 WL 676737 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

510 S.W.3d 901 (Hegwood v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.