Rodgers v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Rodgers v. State

212 S.W.3d 200, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 148, 2007 WL 217564

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 30, 2007

DocketWD 66737

StatusPublished

This text of 212 S.W.3d 200 (Rodgers 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

Rodgers v. State, 212 S.W.3d 200, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 148, 2007 WL 217564 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Robert Rodgers appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. After a thorough review of the record, we find that the judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous and that no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value, but a memorandum explaining our reasoning has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Robert Rodgers appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. After a thorough review of the record, we find that the judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous and that no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value, but a memorandum explaining our reasoning has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 S.W.3d 200, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 148, 2007 WL 217564, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodgers-v-state-moctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack