Westergaard v. State

571 S.W.3d 701
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 16, 2019
DocketNo. ED 106833
StatusPublished

This text of 571 S.W.3d 701 (Westergaard 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
Westergaard v. State, 571 S.W.3d 701 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

The movant, Mark Westergaard, appeals the judgment entered by the Circuit Court of St. Louis County denying, without an evidentiary hearing, his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief relying on State v. Bazell , 497 S.W.3d 263 (Mo. banc 2016). We have reviewed the parties' briefs and the record on appeal and find no clear error. Rule 24.035. An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision.

We affirm the motion court's judgment denying the movant's Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. Rule 84.16(b)(2).

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

Related

State of Missouri v. Amanda N. Bazell
497 S.W.3d 263 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
571 S.W.3d 701, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/westergaard-v-state-moctapp-2019.