Higgins v. State

277 S.W.3d 354, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 198, 2009 WL 436402
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 24, 2009·No. WD 69287·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Ricky Lee Higgins appeals the motion court’s dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion as untimely. He claims that the motion court erred in dismissing his motion because he established that his post-conviction counsel abandoned him. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Higgins v. State, 277 S.W.3d 354, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 198, 2009 WL 436402 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

277 S.W.3d 354 (Higgins v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pursifull v. BRAUN PLASTERING COMPANY, INC.
277 S.W.3d 354 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2009)