Thomas v. State

453 S.W.3d 863, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 98, 2015 WL 427970
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Thomas v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 239
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 3, 2015·No. No. ED 101031·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Eugene Thomas appeals from the motion court’s Conclusions of Law and Order on his Amended Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Judgment and Sentence and Request for Evidentiary Hearing denying his Rule 29.15 claims for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential or precedential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Thomas v. State, 453 S.W.3d 863, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 98, 2015 WL 427970 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

453 S.W.3d 863 (Thomas v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.