Manning v. State

334 S.W.3d 922, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 394, 2011 WL 1004828
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 22, 2011·No. ED 94695·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Arthur Manning appeals the motion court’s denial of his 29.15 motion to vacate judgment. 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

Manning v. State, 334 S.W.3d 922, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 394, 2011 WL 1004828 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

334 S.W.3d 922 (Manning v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Davis
334 S.W.3d 922 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2011)