Render v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Render v. State

362 S.W.3d 482, 2012 WL 941205, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 347

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 20, 2012

DocketED 96150

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 362 S.W.3d 482 (Render 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

Render v. State, 362 S.W.3d 482, 2012 WL 941205, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 347 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Rodrick A. Render (Movant) appeals from the motion court’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order (judgment) denying his Rule 24.035 Amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Judgment or Sentence and Request for Evidentiary Hearing (PCR Motion). Movant was charged with and pled guilty to one count of robbery in the first degree in violation of Section 569.020 1 , two counts of armed criminal action in violation of Section 571.015, one count of burglary in the first degree in violation of 569.160, one count of stealing $500 or more in violation of 570.030, and one count of stealing a credit card in violation of Section 570.030. 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 trial court’s judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

1

. All statutory citations are to RSMo Cum. Supp.2006, unless otherwise indicated.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Rodrick A. Render (Movant) appeals from the motion court’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order (judgment) denying his Rule 24.035 Amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Judgment or Sentence and Request for Evidentiary Hearing (PCR Motion). Movant was charged with and pled guilty to one count of robbery in the first degree in violation of Section 569.020 1 , two counts of armed criminal action in violation of Section 571.015, one count of burglary in the first degree in violation of 569.160, one count of stealing $500 or more in violation of 570.030, and one count of stealing a credit card in violation of Section 570.030. 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 trial court’s judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

1

. All statutory citations are to RSMo Cum. Supp.2006, unless otherwise indicated.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

362 S.W.3d 482, 2012 WL 941205, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/render-v-state-moctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack