Shepherd v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Shepherd v. State

386 S.W.3d 912, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1529, 2012 WL 6018040

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 4, 2012·No. No. ED 98068·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Cortez Shepherd appeals the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Cortez Shepherd appeals the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

Shepherd v. State, 386 S.W.3d 912, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1529, 2012 WL 6018040 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

386 S.W.3d 912 (Shepherd v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.