King v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

King v. State

341 S.W.3d 737, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 684, 2011 WL 1877675

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 17, 2011

DocketED 94808

StatusPublished

This text of 341 S.W.3d 737 (King 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

King v. State, 341 S.W.3d 737, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 684, 2011 WL 1877675 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jeremy King appeals the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed 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.

Jeremy King appeals the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

341 S.W.3d 737, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 684, 2011 WL 1877675, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-state-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack