Pitt v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Pitt v. State

493 S.W.3d 52, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 665, 2016 WL 3568329

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 30, 2016

DocketNo. ED 103286

StatusPublished

This text of 493 S.W.3d 52 (Pitt 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

Pitt v. State, 493 S.W.3d 52, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 665, 2016 WL 3568329 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

' ORDER

PER CURIAM

■ Earl. Chanpe Pitt (“Movant”) appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his amended motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 24.035. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no. error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed 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

■ Earl. Chanpe Pitt (“Movant”) appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his amended motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 24.035. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no. error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

493 S.W.3d 52, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 665, 2016 WL 3568329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pitt-v-state-moctapp-2016.