Robison v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Robison v. State

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

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 24, 2009

DocketED 92375

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 297 S.W.3d 665 (Robison 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

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

Pincite

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

297 S.W.3d 665, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1700, 2009 WL 4279415, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robison-v-state-moctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack