Sapienza v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Sapienza v. State

436 S.W.3d 237, 2013 WL 1209958, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 367

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 26, 2013·No. No. ED 98865·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Sean Sapienza appeals from a Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Sean Sapienza appeals from a Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Sapienza v. State, 436 S.W.3d 237, 2013 WL 1209958, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 367 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

436 S.W.3d 237 (Sapienza v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.