Rhone v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Rhone v. State

265 S.W.3d 358, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1322, 2008 WL 4402750

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 30, 2008

DocketED 90536

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 265 S.W.3d 358 (Rhone 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

Rhone v. State, 265 S.W.3d 358, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1322, 2008 WL 4402750 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Cedric L. Rhone (Movant) appeals from the judgment denying his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 29.15 1 without an evidentiary hearing. Movant contends that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion because his counsel was ineffective for failing to file a pre-trial motion to suppress the identifications by the eyewitnesses.

The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value and we affirm by written order. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2005, unless otherwise indicated.

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