Speer v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Speer v. State

362 S.W.3d 508, 2012 WL 1032909, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 410

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 27, 2012·No. ED 96120·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ernest Speer appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying, following an evi-dentiary hearing, his amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Judgment and Sentence filed pursuant to Rule 29.15 1 (Rule 29.15 motion or post-conviction motion). We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the motion court was not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). 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 their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2010, unless otherwise indicated.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ernest Speer appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying, following an evi-dentiary hearing, his amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Judgment and Sentence filed pursuant to Rule 29.15 1 (Rule 29.15 motion or post-conviction motion). We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the motion court was not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). 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 their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

1

. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2010, unless otherwise indicated.

Speer v. State, 362 S.W.3d 508, 2012 WL 1032909, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 410 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

362 S.W.3d 508 (Speer v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related