Taylor v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Taylor v. State

249 S.W.3d 241, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 443, 2008 WL 850206

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 1, 2008

DocketED 90142

StatusPublished

This text of 249 S.W.3d 241 (Taylor 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

Taylor v. State, 249 S.W.3d 241, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 443, 2008 WL 850206 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The movant, Demetrius Taylor, appeals the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no clear error. Rule 29.15(k). An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision.

The motion court’s order and judgment denying the movant’s Rule 29.15 motion *242 for post-conviction relief is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b)(2).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The movant, Demetrius Taylor, appeals the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no clear error. Rule 29.15(k). An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision.

The motion court’s order and judgment denying the movant’s Rule 29.15 motion *242 for post-conviction relief is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b)(2).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 S.W.3d 241, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 443, 2008 WL 850206, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-state-moctapp-2008.