Stepney v. State

195 S.W.3d 11, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 940, 2006 WL 1736218
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 27, 2006
DocketED 86235
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 195 S.W.3d 11 (Stepney v. State) 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
Stepney v. State, 195 S.W.3d 11, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 940, 2006 WL 1736218 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Robin Stepney appeals from the judgment denying her Rule 24.035 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

*12 We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and no error of law appears. The trial court’s judgment was supported by substantial evidence on the record. No precedential or jurisprudential purpose would be served by an opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the general principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Related

RAW v. Entwistle
195 S.W.3d 11 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
195 S.W.3d 11, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 940, 2006 WL 1736218, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stepney-v-state-moctapp-2006.