Lane v. State

180 S.W.3d 518, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 6, 2006 WL 8435
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided January 3, 2006·No. WD 64567·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

*519 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jeff Lane appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. 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

Lane v. State, 180 S.W.3d 518, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 6, 2006 WL 8435 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

180 S.W.3d 518 (Lane v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Roper
180 S.W.3d 518 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2006)