McDaniel v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

McDaniel v. State

348 S.W.3d 147, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1222, 2011 WL 4356228

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 20, 2011

DocketWD 72940

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 348 S.W.3d 147 (McDaniel 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

McDaniel v. State, 348 S.W.3d 147, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1222, 2011 WL 4356228 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Michael A. McDaniel 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 *148 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Michael A. McDaniel 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 *148 explaining our.reasoning has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

348 S.W.3d 147, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1222, 2011 WL 4356228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdaniel-v-state-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack