Weeks v. Nixon

Missouri Court of Appeals

Weeks v. Nixon

544 S.W.3d 261

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 5, 2017

DocketWD 80233

StatusPublished

This text of 544 S.W.3d 261 (Weeks v. Nixon) 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

Weeks v. Nixon, 544 S.W.3d 261 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Rubin Weeks is currently incarcerated at the Southeast Correctional Center in Charleston, based on his 1992 convictions of kidnapping and forcible rape. In June 2016, Weeks filed a petition for declaratory judgment in the Circuit Court of Cole County against various State government officials, and against management employees of the private firm which provides medical care to inmates in Department of Corrections' facilities. As relevant to this appeal, Weeks' petition challenged his underlying convictions and sentences, and also challenged the defendants' alleged refusal to provide him with necessary medical treatment. The circuit court dismissed Weeks' petition. He appeals. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, we have provided the parties with an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order. Rule 84.16(b).

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Rubin Weeks is currently incarcerated at the Southeast Correctional Center in Charleston, based on his 1992 convictions of kidnapping and forcible rape. In June 2016, Weeks filed a petition for declaratory judgment in the Circuit Court of Cole County against various State government officials, and against management employees of the private firm which provides medical care to inmates in Department of Corrections' facilities. As relevant to this appeal, Weeks' petition challenged his underlying convictions and sentences, and also challenged the defendants' alleged refusal to provide him with necessary medical treatment. The circuit court dismissed Weeks' petition. He appeals. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, we have provided the parties with an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

544 S.W.3d 261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weeks-v-nixon-moctapp-2017.