Williams v. State
Opinion
ORDER
Sandy Williams appeals from the motion court’s judgment denying his Rule 29.15 1 motion for postconviction relief. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Anderson v. State, 196 S.W.3d 28, 33 (Mo.banc 2006). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).
. All rule references are to Mo. R.Crim. P.2006, unless otherwise indicated.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
233 S.W.3d 796 (Williams v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.