Prince v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Prince v. State

468 S.W.3d 909, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 866, 2015 WL 5135076

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 1, 2015·No. No. ED 101813·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Barton Prince (Movant) appeals the judgment entered by the Circuit Court of St. Charles County dismissing his second Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief for lack of jurisdiction and finding Movant was not abandoned by post-conviction counsel.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only 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.

Barton Prince (Movant) appeals the judgment entered by the Circuit Court of St. Charles County dismissing his second Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief for lack of jurisdiction and finding Movant was not abandoned by post-conviction counsel.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the motion court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Prince v. State, 468 S.W.3d 909, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 866, 2015 WL 5135076 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

468 S.W.3d 909 (Prince v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.