Moore v. State

796 S.W.2d 114, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 1409
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 25, 1990·No. No. 57295·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

• Movant appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

Movant was convicted of second degree murder. His conviction was affirmed. State v. Moore, 581 S.W.2d 873 (Mo.App.E.D.1979).

In his motion, movant alleged five instances of ineffective assistance of counsel. An evidentiary hearing was conducted. The motion court filed extensive and complete findings of fact and conclusions of law, and denied relief.

The findings of fact and conclusions of law are fully supported by the record and are not clearly erroneous. No precedential value would be served by an opinion.

The judgment of the motion court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

Moore v. State, 796 S.W.2d 114, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 1409 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).

796 S.W.2d 114 (Moore v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mark S. Moore v. Michael S. Bowersox
106 F.3d 405 (Eighth Circuit, 1997)