Way v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Way v. State

570 S.W.3d 677

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 2, 2019

DocketWD 81679

StatusPublished

This text of 570 S.W.3d 677 (Way 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

Way v. State, 570 S.W.3d 677 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam

Gregory Way appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion after he pled guilty to the class C felony of stealing. Way contends the motion court clearly erred in rejecting his claim that his sentence was in excess of the maximum authorized by law following the Supreme Court's ruling in State v. Bazell , 497 S.W.3d 263 (Mo. banc 2016). Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision because a published opinion would have no precedential value.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Per Curiam

Gregory Way appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion after he pled guilty to the class C felony of stealing. Way contends the motion court clearly erred in rejecting his claim that his sentence was in excess of the maximum authorized by law following the Supreme Court's ruling in State v. Bazell , 497 S.W.3d 263 (Mo. banc 2016). Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision because a published opinion would have no precedential value.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

570 S.W.3d 677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/way-v-state-moctapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack