Jones v. State

253 S.W.3d 133, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 694, 2008 WL 2097432
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Jones v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 111
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 20, 2008·No. ED 90131·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Edwin Jones (Jones) appeals the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. The motion court found that Jones had not pled facts which would entitle him to relief. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record of appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this 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

Jones v. State, 253 S.W.3d 133, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 694, 2008 WL 2097432 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

253 S.W.3d 133 (Jones v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Pendleton
253 S.W.3d 133 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)