McAllister v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

McAllister v. State

477 S.W.3d 97, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 835, 2015 WL 5025158

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 25, 2015·No. No. ED 101661·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Eugene McAllister III (Movant) appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying, ■without an evidentiary hearing, his amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Judgment and Sentence filed pursuant to Rule 29.15 (post-conviction motion).¹ We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the motion court was not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Footnotes

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Eugene McAllister III (Movant) appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying, ■without an evidentiary hearing, his amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Judgment and Sentence filed pursuant to Rule 29.15 (post-conviction motion).¹ We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the motion court was not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Footnotes

McAllister v. State, 477 S.W.3d 97, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 835, 2015 WL 5025158 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

477 S.W.3d 97 (McAllister v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.