Turner v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Turner v. State

75 S.W.3d 289, 2002 WL 857563

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Turner v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 439 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 7, 2002·No. No. ED 79670·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Matthew Turner, appeals the judgment on the merits denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We have [290]*290reviewed the record on appeal and the briefs of the parties and find the motion court’s judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, prepared a memorandum opinion setting forth the reasons for our decision for the use of the parties only. 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Matthew Turner, appeals the judgment on the merits denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We have [290]*290reviewed the record on appeal and the briefs of the parties and find the motion court’s judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, prepared a memorandum opinion setting forth the reasons for our decision for the use of the parties only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Turner v. State, 75 S.W.3d 289, 2002 WL 857563 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

75 S.W.3d 289 (Turner v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.