Meador v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Meador v. State

308 S.W.3d 264, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 450, 2010 WL 1460302

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 13, 2010·No. ED 93059·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Bill D. Meador appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would-have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Bill D. Meador appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would-have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 84.16(b).

Meador v. State, 308 S.W.3d 264, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 450, 2010 WL 1460302 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

308 S.W.3d 264 (Meador v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related