Jackson v. State

162 S.W.3d 33, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 110, 2005 WL 1320142
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Jackson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1674
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided January 25, 2005·No. No. WD 64212·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Amron Jackson appeals from the denial of his motion to set aside the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Appellant claims that, as a result of fraudulent acts committed by the State, this judgment should be set aside pursuant to Rule 74.06(b)(5) and Rule 74.05(d). After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous and that no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value but a memorandum explaining our reasoning has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Jackson v. State, 162 S.W.3d 33, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 110, 2005 WL 1320142 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

162 S.W.3d 33 (Jackson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.