Webster v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Webster v. State

417 S.W.3d 299, 2013 WL 6198316, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1410

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 26, 2013·No. No. ED 99040·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Justin Webster appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his Rule 29.15 amended motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Justin Webster appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his Rule 29.15 amended motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Webster v. State, 417 S.W.3d 299, 2013 WL 6198316, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1410 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

417 S.W.3d 299 (Webster v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.