Wingo v. State

358 S.W.3d 586, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 170, 2012 WL 453739
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Wingo v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 624
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 14, 2012·No. ED 96483·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Dwayne Wingo, appeals from the judgment denying on the merits his Rule 29.15 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. 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 furnished 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

Wingo v. State, 358 S.W.3d 586, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 170, 2012 WL 453739 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

358 S.W.3d 586 (Wingo v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Helm v. State
358 S.W.3d 586 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2012)