Richard v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Richard v. State

345 S.W.3d 400, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1074, 2011 WL 3586508

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 16, 2011·No. ED 95229·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Karl Richard (Movant) appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evi-dentiary hearing.

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 opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Karl Richard (Movant) appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evi-dentiary hearing.

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 opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Richard v. State, 345 S.W.3d 400, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1074, 2011 WL 3586508 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

345 S.W.3d 400 (Richard v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related