Sneed v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Sneed v. State

443 S.W.3d 729, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1082, 2014 WL 4832316

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 30, 2014·No. No. ED 100939·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Bradley Sneed (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court that denied his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to, Rule 29.15 without an eviden-tiary hearing.

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.

Bradley Sneed (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment of the motion court that denied his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to, Rule 29.15 without an eviden-tiary hearing.

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).

Sneed v. State, 443 S.W.3d 729, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1082, 2014 WL 4832316 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

443 S.W.3d 729 (Sneed v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.