Tyler v. State

18 S.W.3d 117, 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 519, 2000 WL 387098
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 18, 2000·No. No. ED 75368·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Melvin Leroy Tyler (“Movant”) appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 27.26 motion to vacate, set aside or correct his judgment and sentence without an eviden-tiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court’s determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 27.26(j). An extended opinion would be of no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion, for the use of the parties only, setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Tyler v. State, 18 S.W.3d 117, 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 519, 2000 WL 387098 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000).

18 S.W.3d 117 (Tyler v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tyler v. Korneman
E.D. Missouri, 2024
State of Missouri v. Tyler
E.D. Missouri, 2020
Tyler v. Schollmeyer
E.D. Missouri, 2019
Tyler v. State
292 S.W.3d 338 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2009)
State v. Tyler
103 S.W.3d 245 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)