Whitehead v. State

964 S.W.2d 465, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 301, 1998 WL 65778
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 17, 1998
DocketNo. 72129
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 964 S.W.2d 465 (Whitehead 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
Whitehead v. State, 964 S.W.2d 465, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 301, 1998 WL 65778 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Mark Whitehead, Movant, appeals from the judgment entered denying his Rule 29.16 motion for post-conviction relief. Movant filed the motion after his convictions for second degree murder and armed criminal action.

We have reviewed the record on appeal and the briefs of the parties and find the motion court’s determination is not clearly erroneous. Rule 24.035(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, prepared a memorandum opinion setting forth the reasons for our decision for the use of the parties only. 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
964 S.W.2d 465, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 301, 1998 WL 65778, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whitehead-v-state-moctapp-1998.