Ingrassia v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Ingrassia v. State

252 S.W.3d 225, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 634, 2008 WL 1958925

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 6, 2008

DocketED 89963

StatusPublished

This text of 252 S.W.3d 225 (Ingrassia 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

Ingrassia v. State, 252 S.W.3d 225, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 634, 2008 WL 1958925 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Thomas J. Ingrassia (Movant) appeals the motion court’s denial, after an eviden-tiary hearing, of his amended Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. The judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact and conclusions of law that are not clearly erroneous. Rule 84.16(b)(2); Rule 29.15(k). No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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