Robison v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Robison v. State

297 S.W.3d 665, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1700, 2009 WL 4279415

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 24, 2009·No. ED 92375·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ernest Robison appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion 1 for postconviction relief, after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. Griffith v. State, 233 S.W.3d 774, 776 (Mo.App. E.D.2007). 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).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2008, unless otherwise indicated.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ernest Robison appeals from the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion 1 for postconviction relief, after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous. Griffith v. State, 233 S.W.3d 774, 776 (Mo.App. E.D.2007). 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).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2008, unless otherwise indicated.

Robison v. State, 297 S.W.3d 665, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1700, 2009 WL 4279415 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

297 S.W.3d 665 (Robison v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related