Morgan v. State

364 S.W.3d 265, 2012 WL 1332579, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 465
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 10, 2012
DocketED 96584
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 364 S.W.3d 265 (Morgan 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
Morgan v. State, 364 S.W.3d 265, 2012 WL 1332579, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 465 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James D. Morgan appeals from the motion court’s findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order (judgment) denying his Rule 29.15 Amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct the Judgment or Sentence after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential or precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the motion court’s judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Related

HITTLER v. State
364 S.W.3d 265 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
364 S.W.3d 265, 2012 WL 1332579, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 465, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morgan-v-state-moctapp-2012.