Wilson v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Wilson v. State

103 S.W.3d 810, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 243, 2003 WL 442957

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Wilson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 840 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 25, 2003·No. No. ED 81393·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Naketia Wilson, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. The trial court’s findings of fact are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Naketia Wilson, appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. The trial court’s findings of fact are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Wilson v. State, 103 S.W.3d 810, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 243, 2003 WL 442957 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

103 S.W.3d 810 (Wilson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.