Taylor v. State
169 S.W.3d 897, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1283, 2005 WL 2088364
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Taylor v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1457 →
Opinion
ORDER
Movant, Chadrick Taylor, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, movant argues that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance during the sentencing hearing.
The trial court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Taylor v. State, 169 S.W.3d 897, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1283, 2005 WL 2088364 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).
169 S.W.3d 897 (Taylor v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
In Re Marriage of Johanson
169 S.W.3d 897 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2005)