Jones v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Jones v. State

996 S.W.2d 743, 1999 Mo. App. LEXIS 750, 1999 WL 446690

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 1, 1999

DocketNo. 74133

StatusPublished

This text of 996 S.W.2d 743 (Jones 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

Jones v. State, 996 S.W.2d 743, 1999 Mo. App. LEXIS 750, 1999 WL 446690 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant Sandra Diane Jones appeals the judgment denying her Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court’s determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant Sandra Diane Jones appeals the judgment denying her Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court’s determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

996 S.W.2d 743, 1999 Mo. App. LEXIS 750, 1999 WL 446690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-state-moctapp-1999.