Summers v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Summers v. State

497 S.W.3d 357, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 838, 2016 WL 4525433

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 30, 2016·No. No. ED 103568·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Seth Summers appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We find the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous and affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with [358] a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Seth Summers appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We find the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous and affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with [358] a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Summers v. State, 497 S.W.3d 357, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 838, 2016 WL 4525433 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

497 S.W.3d 357 (Summers v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.