Rogers v. State

342 S.W.3d 441, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 817, 2011 WL 2328248
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 14, 2011·No. ED 94855·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Darrell M. Rogers, appeals from a judgment denying on the merits his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing on one of his two claims. The findings and conclusions *442 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 with 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

Rogers v. State, 342 S.W.3d 441, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 817, 2011 WL 2328248 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

342 S.W.3d 441 (Rogers v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lehenbauer v. Lehenbauer
342 S.W.3d 441 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2011)