Neubauer v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Neubauer v. State

476 S.W.3d 307, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1180, 2015 WL 7253008

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 17, 2015

DocketNo. ED 102414

StatusPublished

This text of 476 S.W.3d 307 (Neubauer 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

Neubauer v. State, 476 S.W.3d 307, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1180, 2015 WL 7253008 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER'CURIAM

Charles T. Neubauer appeals from the motion court’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law denying, following an evi-dentiary hearing, his amended Rule 24.035 Motion to Vacate,. Set Aside, or Correct Judgment and Sentence. We affirm.

[308]*308We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential or precedential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER'CURIAM

Charles T. Neubauer appeals from the motion court’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law denying, following an evi-dentiary hearing, his amended Rule 24.035 Motion to Vacate,. Set Aside, or Correct Judgment and Sentence. We affirm.

[308]*308We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential or precedential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

476 S.W.3d 307, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1180, 2015 WL 7253008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neubauer-v-state-moctapp-2015.