Ray v. State

100 S.W.3d 148, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 362, 2003 WL 1215392
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 18, 2003·No. No. ED 81408·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Lynn Ray appeals from a judgment denying without an evidentiary hearing his motion for post-conviction relief filed under Rule 24.035.1 We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Footnotes

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

Ray v. State, 100 S.W.3d 148, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 362, 2003 WL 1215392 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).

100 S.W.3d 148 (Ray v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Avery v. State
217 S.W.3d 162 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2005)