State v. Radley

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Radley

538 S.W.3d 345

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 19, 2017

DocketWD 80077

StatusPublished

This text of 538 S.W.3d 345 (State v. Radley) 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. Radley, 538 S.W.3d 345 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

*346Jerry Radley appeals from the denial of his "Motion Requesting Sua Spont[e] Inquiry into Abandonment by Postconviction Counsel," which also alleged that "Counsel Labored Under a Conflict of Interest." Radley argues that the court erred in denying his motion on the ground that the court lacked jurisdiction. Because the court did not clearly err in denying Radley's motion, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Per Curiam:

*346Jerry Radley appeals from the denial of his "Motion Requesting Sua Spont[e] Inquiry into Abandonment by Postconviction Counsel," which also alleged that "Counsel Labored Under a Conflict of Interest." Radley argues that the court erred in denying his motion on the ground that the court lacked jurisdiction. Because the court did not clearly err in denying Radley's motion, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

538 S.W.3d 345, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-radley-moctapp-2017.