Schmedeke v. State

145 S.W.3d 856, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 1437, 2004 WL 2221727
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Schmedeke v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 811
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 5, 2004·No. No. ED 84266·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James J. Schmedeke (Appellant) appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.151 motion for postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court did not err in denying without an evidentiary hearing Appellant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for them use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 84.16(b).

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

Schmedeke v. State, 145 S.W.3d 856, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 1437, 2004 WL 2221727 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004).

145 S.W.3d 856 (Schmedeke v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.