Johnson v. State

284 S.W.3d 777, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 787, 2009 WL 1588706
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 9, 2009·No. ED 91521·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kevin A. Johnson (Movant) appeals from the motion court’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order (judgment) denying his Amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Judgment and Sentence, filed pursuant to Rule 29.15, following an evidentiary hearing.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claim of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no precedential value or serve any jurisprudential purpose. The motion court’s judgment is affirmed. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Johnson v. State, 284 S.W.3d 777, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 787, 2009 WL 1588706 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

284 S.W.3d 777 (Johnson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Howard v. State
284 S.W.3d 777 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2009)