Metcalf v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Metcalf v. State

374 S.W.3d 403, 2012 WL 3667431, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1028

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 28, 2012·No. No. ED 97305·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Shohn Metcalf appeals from the motion court’s findings of fact, conclusions of law and judgment denying his Rule 29.15¹ post-conviction relief motion without an ev-identiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the motion court’s findings and conclusions are 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.

Shohn Metcalf appeals from the motion court’s findings of fact, conclusions of law and judgment denying his Rule 29.15¹ post-conviction relief motion without an ev-identiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the motion court’s findings and conclusions are 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

Metcalf v. State, 374 S.W.3d 403, 2012 WL 3667431, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1028 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

374 S.W.3d 403 (Metcalf v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.