Jackson v. State
160 S.W.3d 420, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 551, 2005 WL 831881
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Jackson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1674 →
Opinion
ORDER
Movant, Jose Jackson, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an eviden-tiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s judgment is not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties with a brief memorandum opinion, for their information only, explaining the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Jackson v. State, 160 S.W.3d 420, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 551, 2005 WL 831881 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).
160 S.W.3d 420 (Jackson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.