Waters v. State

354 S.W.3d 670, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1688, 2011 WL 6433697
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 20, 2011·No. ED 94993·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Andrew Waters appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for postcon-viction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court did not err in denying Waters’ request for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).

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

Waters v. State, 354 S.W.3d 670, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1688, 2011 WL 6433697 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

354 S.W.3d 670 (Waters v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Green v. State
354 S.W.3d 670 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2011)