State v. Morgan

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Morgan

900 S.W.2d 281, 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 1209, 1995 WL 379349

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 27, 1995

DocketNos. 63216, 66961

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 900 S.W.2d 281 (State v. Morgan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Morgan, 900 S.W.2d 281, 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 1209, 1995 WL 379349 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from his conviction by a jury of two counts of sodomy and one count of rape and his sentence as a prior offender to consecutive fifteen year prison terms for each count. He also appeals from denial of his Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion without evidentiary hearing. No error of law appears, the verdict is supported by the evidence, and the issues raised by the defendant are without merit. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgment on the rule 29.15 motion is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous, no error of law appears, and an opinion would have no precedential value.

Judgments on direct appeal and on Rule 29.15 appeal are affirmed. Rules 30.25(b), 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from his conviction by a jury of two counts of sodomy and one count of rape and his sentence as a prior offender to consecutive fifteen year prison terms for each count. He also appeals from denial of his Rule 29.15 post-conviction motion without evidentiary hearing. No error of law appears, the verdict is supported by the evidence, and the issues raised by the defendant are without merit. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgment on the rule 29.15 motion is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous, no error of law appears, and an opinion would have no precedential value.

Judgments on direct appeal and on Rule 29.15 appeal are affirmed. Rules 30.25(b), 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

900 S.W.2d 281, 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 1209, 1995 WL 379349, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-morgan-moctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack