Helt v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Helt v. State

380 S.W.3d 616, 2012 WL 4086660, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1160

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 18, 2012·No. No. ED 97926·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Orlan Helt (Movant) appeals from the judgment of the circuit court of Washington County denying, without an evidentia-ry hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief.

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.

Orlan Helt (Movant) appeals from the judgment of the circuit court of Washington County denying, without an evidentia-ry hearing, his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief.

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).

Helt v. State, 380 S.W.3d 616, 2012 WL 4086660, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1160 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

380 S.W.3d 616 (Helt v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.