Lee v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Lee v. State

423 S.W.3d 309, 2014 WL 721394, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 181

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 25, 2014·No. No. ED 99638·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James Lee (Movant) appeals the motion court’s judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 24.035 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 opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James Lee (Movant) appeals the motion court’s judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 24.035 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 opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Lee v. State, 423 S.W.3d 309, 2014 WL 721394, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 181 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

423 S.W.3d 309 (Lee v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.