Ritter v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Ritter v. State

172 S.W.3d 463, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1974, 2005 WL 2351926

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 20, 2005·No. No. ED 85120·Published

Opinion

[464]*464 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Michael J. Ritter, Jr., appeals from a judgment denying on the merits his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.

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

[464]*464 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Michael J. Ritter, Jr., appeals from a judgment denying on the merits his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.

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

Ritter v. State, 172 S.W.3d 463, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1974, 2005 WL 2351926 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

172 S.W.3d 463 (Ritter v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.