White v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

White v. State

180 S.W.3d 83, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1926, 2005 WL 3526573

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 27, 2005·No. ED 84748·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Jason White, appeals from the judgment denying on the merits his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment 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.

Movant, Jason White, appeals from the judgment denying on the merits his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

White v. State, 180 S.W.3d 83, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1926, 2005 WL 3526573 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

180 S.W.3d 83 (White v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related